ArticleQuantitative plant biology2025
Monitoring wood phenology using dendrometers: opportunities and pitfalls.
Article in Quantitative plant biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From microscopic movements to forest-scale insights: the Nordic Dendrometer Meeting and the emergence of the Global Dendrometer Network.Tree physiology · 2026Article
- Frequency-dependent climate sensitivity of sub-daily radial growth of tree stems at the dry Arctic treeline.Tree physiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numerous studies have investigated the impact of climate change on tree growth and carbon sequestration, exploring the effect of climatic factors on the onset and cessation of wood formation. Some studies used microcores for histological observations of xylem, while many others used dendrometer recordings to infer stem growth. However, the reliability of dendrometers in providing accurate estimates of growth phenology has yet to be fully assessed. We compared the phenology estimated using dendrometer- and microcore-based approaches for six tree species growing in contrasted site conditions and exhibiting contrasted tree-ring structures (non-porous, diffuse-porous and ring-porous) and bark types (smooth, scaled, fissured). Our results show that dendrometer estimate accuracy is poor and varied according to several factors, including species life traits, climate and site conditions. These results highlight the limitations of dendrometers in evaluating wood phenology in trees, and advocate for the concurrent monitoring of xylogenesis.
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.