ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of plant community composition and ecological benefits based on six urban greenway plant species.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the acceleration of urbanization, urban greenways, as an important part of urban ecosystems, play a crucial role in maintaining ecological balance and enhancing urban environmental quality through the diversity and structure of their plant communities. This study analyzed 30 sample sites from 10 urban greenways in Minhang District, Shanghai, focusing on 4 biodiversity indices (SRI, SDI, SWDI, SE) and 5 ecological benefit indicators (microclimate adjustment, negative oxygen ion provision, PM2.5/PM10/TSP reduction, noise reduction, wind protection). The results showed that mixed vegetation types (MDEBF and MCBF) had significant advantages in biodiversity, their SRI reached 11.82 ± 1.37 and 13.00 ± 0.00, SDI reached 0.47 ± 0.05 and 0.52 ± 0.11, SWDI reached 0.81 ± 0.08 and 0.87 ± 0.20, and SE reached 0.63 ± 0.05 and 0.65 ± 0.14, all significantly higher than other types (P < 0.05). In terms of ecological benefits, MDEBF and MCBF performed more prominently: MDEBF had an average cooling rate of 22.75%, negative oxygen ion CI enhancement rate of 62.45%, and PM10 reduction rate of 13.58%; MCBF had a PM2.5 reduction rate of 14.04% and wind speed attenuation rate of 50.97%, which were better than single vegetation types. In contrast, monoculture evergreen broad-leaved forest (EBF) performed relatively poorly in both biodiversity (the lowest SRI of 5.83 ± 1.28 and SWDI of 0.20 ± 0.03) and ecological benefits. In addition, structural characteristics of plant communities, such as mean canopy width and mean sub-leaf height, were significantly correlated with their ecological benefits (P < 0.05). The results of the study provide a scientific basis for optimizing the plant configuration of urban greenways and enhancing their ecological functions, which can help promote sustainable urban development.
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.