ArticleForestry research2025
Effects of stand structural diversity on carbon storage of Masson pine forests in Fengyang Mountain Nature Reserve, China.
Article in Forestry research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Optimizing forest structure for sustainability: a review of structure-based management effects on stand quality.Forestry research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stand structural diversity, encompassing spatial and non-spatial dimensions, is a key indicator of forest carbon storage, yet its relative impacts on multiple carbon pools remain unclear. Additionally, whether structural diversity consistently influences carbon storage across overstory, understory, and soil layers is uncertain. This study examined carbon storage dynamics across 13 secondary Masson pine forests within the Fengyang Mountain Nature Reserve. Principal component analysis was used to classify the stands into three types based on their spatial and non-spatial structural diversity: Type I (high spatial and high non-spatial diversity), Type II (high spatial but low non-spatial diversity), and Type III (low spatial and low non-spatial diversity). Total carbon storage was highest in Type I, while carbon storage in the understory layers was lowest in this type. Spatial structural diversity had a stronger influence on carbon storage than non-spatial diversity, with the uniform angle index primarily affecting overstory carbon storage, and the crowding index influenced understory carbon storage. Random forest analysis identified biomass and structural diversity as major predictors of carbon storage. Partial least squares path modeling revealed that spatial structural diversity indirectly increased overstory and soil carbon storage, but reduced understory carbon storage by modulating biomass. Our results highlight that spatial structural diversity is a dominant driver of carbon storage in forest ecosystems, with contrasting effects on overstory, understory, and soil layers, underscoring its critical role in regulating forest carbon dynamics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.