Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42316835›Full record

ReviewGlobal change biology2026

Global Bias-Aware Synthesis of Meta-Analyses Reveals Agroforestry's Potential for Improving Soil Health.

Rubeaud Camille Manon, Beillouin Damien, Köthke Margret, Six Johan, Walder Florian, Schievano Andrea, Kay Sonja

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Global change biology, 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

7 authors.

Rubeaud Camille ManonAgroscope, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID 0009-0007-0377-0720
Beillouin DamienCIRAD, UPR HortSys, Univ Montpellier, Montpellier, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2014-3482
Köthke MargretThünen Institute of Forestry, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5368-7641
Six JohanSustainable Agroecosystems Group, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-9336-4185
Walder FlorianAgroscope, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7731-7469
Schievano AndreaJoint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy.
Kay SonjaAgroscope, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-0531-4407

Funding

DigitAF project 101059794European Commission, European Research Agency
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Agroforestry systems (AFS), which integrate trees into agricultural landscapes, offer a promising strategy for climate change mitigation and biodiversity restoration. The trees can access additional resources, improving soil functions and contributing to soil regeneration through increased organic matter inputs. However, evidence is scattered and thus hindering unified global quantification of impacts. Here, we present the first bias-adjusted global quantitative synthesis of agroforestry effects on distinct soil and water attributes, drawing on 1590 primary studies summarized in 26 meta-analyses. We evaluated each meta-analysis against 16 standardized quality criteria. Less than half of the meta-analyses met > 75% of these criteria, while most did not weigh effect-sizes or assess heterogeneity and publication bias. We quantified primary studies overlap, finding an overall redundancy of 18% across all soil parameters, most of which arise from studies reporting on soil carbon. Accounting for meta-analysis quality and bias, AFS tend to increase soil organic carbon by 20%, improve chemical soil quality by 59%, physical soil quality by 22%, and enhance water regulation by 71%. Biological soil quality (86%), nutrient leaching reduction (67%), and erosion control (6%) also benefit from AFS, though with higher heterogeneity. Evidence is extensive for soil organic carbon and chemical properties (73% of studies), whereas it remains limited for AFS effects on biological (< 12%), physical (< 19%), and water-regulation traits (< 27%). 58% of meta-analyses report no details at all on system characteristics, such as stand age, species diversity, or tree density, limiting the identification of AFS management practices that maximize soil health attributes and highlight the need for standardized definitions of agroforestry and consistent sampling protocols. By systematically evaluating meta-analysis quality and study overlap, this synthesis provides a robust framework to distinguish reliable from uncertain outcomes and demonstrates the capacity of agroforestry to deliver multifunctional benefits, particularly regarding soil health.

Indexed as

AgricultureForestrySoilClimate ChangeMeta-Analysis as TopicTreesSoilerosionnutrient leachingrobust Bayesian meta‐analysissoil biological qualitysoil chemical qualitysoil functionssoil organic carbonsoil physical qualitywater regulation

Identifiers

PMID42316835
PMCPMC13280171

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.