Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41826543›Full record

ArticleAmbio2026

What makes a mountain?

Øyvind Paasche, Helle Siljeholm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ambio, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Øyvind PaascheDepartment of Climate Dynamics, NORCE, Bergen, Norway. oypa@norceresearch.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0329-9063
Helle SiljeholmOslo National Academy of Arts, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mountains are visually striking landforms that influence climate, ecosystems, and biodiversity through the steep gradients they create. Their dynamic environments attract diverse life forms, including humans-who depend on mountains for resources, refuge, and inspiration. Human concern with protecting and managing these landscapes has led to legal designations such as national parks, nature reserves, and, increasingly, restoration initiatives. Yet efforts to define mountains universally remain contested: global mapping suggests they cover between 12 and 30% of Earth's land surface, but mountains beneath ice sheets or oceans remain excluded. To explore how perceptions of mountains shape their definition and value, we examine three European cases: Mt. Snøhetta (Norway), the Dolomites (Italy), and Mt. Parnassos (Greece). Each illustrates how science, myth, and culture inform human-mountain relationships. We introduce the "Næss dilemma," highlighting the paradox that while empathy for mountains depends on interaction, such engagement inevitably alters what we seek to preserve.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemAltitudeBiodiversityHumansItalyNorwayArtMountainNaturePreservationRestorationValue

Identifiers

PMID41826543
PMCPMC13319853

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.