ArticleFrontiers in plant science2025
Synergies and trade-offs in forest carbon pools: separating universal drivers from forest type-specific controls.
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 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.
- Soil fertility context shapes biodiversity-carbon associations across forest strata in a subtropical karst landscape.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Projected spatiotemporal shifts in forest community suitability in the northeastern Qinghai-Tibet Plateau under climate change.Frontiers in plant science · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Understanding the synergies and trade-offs among tree, understory, and soil carbon pools is critical for optimizing forest carbon sinks. However, the mechanisms regulating these relationships, particularly how they differ between natural and planted forests, remain unclear. This study aims to deconstruct these complex interactions in subtropical forests to provide a scientific basis for enhancing ecosystem carbon storage. Methods: Based on data from 440 plots covering six major forest types in subtropical China, we employed linear mixed-effects models (LMMs) to quantify universal and context-dependent driver effects. We then used structural equation models (SEMs) to test and compare the mechanistic pathways of carbon allocation in natural versus planted forests. Results: Our LMMs revealed a universal trade-off, with tree layer carbon density (TCD) strongly suppressing understory carbon density (UCD) (β = -0.22, P < 0.001) while synergistically promoting soil organic carbon density (SOCD) (β = 0.36, P < 0.001). SEM analysis (natural forests: CFI = 0.986, RMSEA = 0.064; planted forests: CFI = 0.960, RMSEA = 0.076) revealed divergent regulatory mechanisms. In natural forests, tree diversity directly buffered the suppressive effect of TCD on UCD via a significant positive path (β = 0.22, P < 0.01). This buffering pathway was absent in planted forests, leading to an amplified TCD-UCD trade-off (β = -0.54, P < 0.001). Discussion: Our findings demonstrate that forest carbon allocation is governed by a vertical trade-off and an above-belowground synergy, with tree diversity acting as a key modulator. Compared with complex natural forests, the carbon allocation mechanism in planted forests is simplified with more acute trade-offs. We conclude that enhancing structural and species diversity in plantations is a critical pathway for synergistically optimizing the entire ecosystem's carbon sink capacity.
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.