ReviewGlobal change biology2026
How Mixed Are Production-Oriented Planted Forests? A Global Review and Classification Approach.
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.
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
Abstract
Mixed planted forests (MPF) are increasingly recognized for their potential to reconcile forest productivity with biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services, such as climate adaptation and mitigation. They can be mixed in multiple ways, but the lack of a standardized procedure to compare mixture levels has hindered the exploration of their potential benefits, rendering the term "mixed" too generic to support meaningful comparisons across studies or informed decision-making. This study aims to (i) conduct a global literature review of the characteristics of MPF established for production (i.e., excluding biodiversity-oriented forests), and (ii) develop an index to classify production-oriented planted forests according to their level of mixture. We systematically screened the literature and selected 153 studies covering 253 MPF stands, from which we extracted detailed information on management practices using 10 criteria related to species composition (e.g., number of species, genetic diversity, species origin, functional composition) and structural/spatial design (e.g., spatial distribution, age heterogeneity, understory natural regeneration). We propose an index to classify MPF according to mixture level (scaled to a 0-1 range) based on a multi-criteria decision analysis using the PROMETHEE II outranking method. The MPF diversity index serves as a classification tool for MPF designs based on their relative dominance across multiple indicators. The results revealed that most published MPF worldwide occupy low to intermediate positions along the diversity gradient (index mean = 0.48), indicating a diversity gap even among intentionally diverse production-oriented planted forests. The proposed index provides a transparent and comparative classification of MPF designs that can support policy and management decisions by highlighting differences in diversity-related design attributes.
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.