ArticleScientific reports2025
Unveiling spatiotemporal dynamics and drivers of ecosystem services to optimize the ecological zoning management in the Luo river basin.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
The comprehensive ecosystem service index (CESI) and ecosystem service bundles (ES bundles) were integrated, combined with the optimal parameter geographic detector and multi-scale geographically weighted regression to reveal the spatiotemporal differentiation and driving mechanism of ecosystem services (ESs) in Luo River Basin. The results show that the spatial distribution of ESs is low in the northeast and high in the southwest, similar to the distribution of forests. The average annual growth rates of water yield, carbon storage, and soil retention were 4.71%, 0.05%, and 8.97% respectively, and the spatial increase area accounted for more than 90%. Habitat quality decreased by an average of 0.31% per year, with 39.76% of the region declining. The upstream ecological benefits of CESI are better than those of the downstream, and ES bundles identify two high supply modes (B2, B3). Precipitation, normalized difference vegetation index, and slope are the dominant driving factors of ESs and CESI. Based on the heterogeneity of driving responses, a watershed zoning governance framework is proposed. Upstream vegetation structure needs to be optimized; the disorderly expansion of downstream cities should be curbed to provide a scientific basis for the next stage of the Grain for Green program and spatially differentiated governance.
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.