ArticlePeerJ2026
Constructing pathways for glycine betaine in cross-domain ecological restoration: a bibliometric analysis.
Article in PeerJ, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Grassland ecosystems play a critical role in global ecological security and sustainable development. However, they are experiencing continuous functional decline due to multiple stresses under climate change. Glycine betaine (GB) has been systematically studied for enhancing stress tolerance in agricultural crops. Nevertheless, a knowledge gap exists regarding its application in the restoration of degraded grasslands. What social-ecological values might emerge from addressing this gap? Methods: To address these questions, this study conducted a systematic bibliometric analysis of GB research from 1980 to 2023. The analysis was based on 295 core publications: 132 from the China National Knowledge Infrastructure and 163 from the Web of Science Core Collection. Tailored query strategies were employed in both databases to capture studies on exogenous GB application in plants. After rigorous screening to exclude irrelevant topics, the final corpus was analyzed using VOSviewer and CiteSpace. Analyses included keyword evolution, co-occurrence networks, research trajectory mapping, and collaboration pattern visualization. Results: The analysis reveals a complementary global research landscape. International studies exhibit a "mechanism-oriented" trajectory, while Chinese research demonstrates an "application-driven" trajectory. However, research subjects are overwhelmingly concentrated on agricultural crops. Studies on keystone grassland species are nearly absent. Research settings are largely confined to controlled environments, lacking field validation and ecosystem-level assessments. This structural gap provides an empirical basis for further investigation. Building on it, this study adopts a "technology-ecology-society" integrated perspective. It proposes a conceptual five-node cyclic model: Technology → Ecology→ Well-being → People→ City→ Technology. The model redefines GB from a static "technological tool" into a dynamically evolving agent within the social-ecological system. It outlines a three-phase evolutionary pathway: Emergency Response, Functional Restructuring, and Model Transition. Conclusion: The core value of the model lies in articulating that the migration of GB technology from agriculture to grassland restoration could initiate a virtuous cycle. Rural and urban residents respectively gain the economic and ecological values they currently lack. Enhanced well-being drives the stabilization and agglomeration of human resources. Urban prosperity reinforces technological innovation. This model serves as a heuristic tool. It provides a theoretical framework for the targeted migration of GB technology into grassland ecosystem restoration. It also offers a transferable conceptual model for other agricultural technologies entering ecosystem restoration domains.
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.