ArticleBiology2026
Does Vegetation Recovery Limit the Habitat Use of Herbivore? Decadal Evidence of a Potential Ecological Mismatch.
Article in Biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Large-scale forest ecological restoration is commonly expected to improve habitat quality and promote population growth of forest-dependent herbivores. Yet, whether vegetation recovery facilitates or constrains herbivore growth and habitat use at local scales within nature reserves remains unclear, as vegetation recovery and canopy closure might alter forage availability and lead to ecological mismatch between vegetation features and population dynamic. Here, we used the endangered species South China sika deer as the study species, and its dominant distribution region-Qingliangfeng Biosphere Reserve-as the study area. Using decadal camera-trapping data (2015-2024) and extracted vegetation and other environmental variables, we quantified decadal trends in sika deer activity intensity and interannual variation in vegetation (leaf area index, LAI, and normalized difference vegetation index, NDVI). We incorporated topographic and anthropogenic disturbance variables and applied generalized linear mixed models and generalized linear models to analyze its habitat use. We found that: (1) Numbers of independent photographs and the relative abundance index of sika deer increased significantly and consistently from 2015 to 2024. (2) LAI exhibited substantial interannual variability without a stable trend. In contrast, segmented regression identified a clear temporal breakpoint in NDVI, with a significant increasing trend before 2021 followed by a pronounced decline thereafter. (3) In all years, distance to settlement had a significant and negative effect on activity intensity, whereas distance to road, elevation, and year had significant positive effects. LAI and NDVI showed negative and weak effects on sika deer activity intensity. In specific years, LAI had a significantly negative effect in early periods whereas NDVI became significantly negative in mid and late periods. Other environmental variables exhibited interannual heterogeneity. Our findings demonstrate that vegetation recovery within the reserve does not automatically improve habitats for forest-dependent herbivores and could lead to a potential ecological mismatch.
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.