The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effect of allelopathy on plant performance: a meta‐analysis
Abstract
Allelopathy (i.e. chemical interactions between plants) is known to affect individual performance, community structure and plant invasions. Yet, a quantitative synthesis is lacking. Here, we performed a meta‐analysis of 384 studies that measured allelopathic effects of one species (allelopathy plant) on another species or itself (test plant). Overall, allelopathy reduced plant performance by 25%, but the variation in allelopathy was high. The type of method affected the allelopathic effect: compared to leachates, allelopathy was more negative when residues of allelopathy plants were applied, and less negative when soil conditioned by allelopathy plants was applied. The negative effects of allelopathy diminished with study duration, and increased with concentrations of leachates or residues. Although allelopathy was not significantly related to lifespan, life form or domestication of the interacting plants, it became more negative with increasing phylogenetic distance. Moreover, native plants suffered more from leachates of naturalised alien plants than from leachates of other native plants. Our synthesis reveals that allelopathy could contribute to success of alien plants. The negative relationship between phylogenetic distance and allelopathy indicates that allelopathy might contribute to coexistence of closely related species (i.e. convergence) or dominance of single species.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2025) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 352,181
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Abràmoff, M. D., Magalhães, P. J., & Ram, S. J. (2004) · Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) · Cited by 11,821
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
brms : An R Package for Bayesian Multilevel Models Using Stan
Bürkner, P.-C. (2017) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v080.i01 · Cited by 9,476
ape 5.0: an environment for modern phylogenetics and evolutionary analyses in R
Paradis, E., & Schliep, K. (2019) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bty633 · Cited by 9,108
The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.
Rosenthal, R. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · Cited by 9,068
(2015) · doi:10.1007/s11222-016-9696-4 · Cited by 5,611
Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution
Pagel, M. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/44766 · Cited by 5,200
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, Z., Liu, Y., Yuan, L., Weber, E., & van Kleunen, M.
- Venue
- Ecology Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-10-21
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 348-362
- ISSN
- 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
- 1461-0248
- OpenAlex
- W3093937705
- Cited by
- 303
- References
- 60
- FWCI
- 21.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effect of allelopathy on plant performance: a meta‐analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/ele.13627
- The paper
- Zhang, Z., Liu, Y., Yuan, L., Weber, E., & van Kleunen, M. (2021). Effect of allelopathy on plant performance: a meta‐analysis. Ecology Letters. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13627
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.