| Literature DB >> 30828359 |
Jie Wu1, Xiwen Li1, Linfang Huang2, Xiangxiao Meng1, Haoyu Hu1, Lu Luo1, Shilin Chen1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The endangered rate of medicinal plant exceeds that of endangered plant species. However, blindly introducing medicinal plants in regions without comprehensively considering the involved environmental factors results in diseases and insect pests and the consequent overproof pesticide residue as well as reduces the quality of herbal medicine produced.Entities:
Keywords: Ecologically suitable regions; Euclidean distance; GMPGIS; Medicinal plant; Range-based method
Year: 2019 PMID: 30828359 PMCID: PMC6383245 DOI: 10.1186/s13020-019-0226-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chin Med ISSN: 1749-8546 Impact factor: 5.455
Soil compositions
| Field | Description | UNITS | DSMW | SOTWIS | CHINA | ESDB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T_GRAVEL | Topsoil gravel content | %vol. | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_SAND | Topsoil sand fraction | % wt | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_SILT | Topsoil silt fraction | % wt | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_CLAY | Topsoil clay fraction | % wt | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_USDA_TEX_CLASS | Topsoil USDA texture classification | Name | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_REF_BULK_DENSITY | Topsoil reference bulk density | kg/dm3 | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_OC | Topsoil organic carbon | % weight | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_PH_H2O | Topsoil pH (H2O) | − log(H +) | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_CEC_CLAY | Topsoil CEC (clay) | cmol/kg | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_CEC_SOIL | Topsoil CEC (soil) | cmol/kg | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_BS | Topsoil base saturation | % | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_TEB | Topsoil TEB | cmol/kg | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_CACO3 | Topsoil calcium carbonate | % weight | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_CASO4 | Topsoil gypsum | % weight | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_ESP | Topsoil sodicity (ESP) | % | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| T_ECE | Topsoil SALINITY (Elco) | dS/m | √ | √ | √ | √ |
Fig. 1Working principle of the Global Medicinal Plant Geographic Information System (GMPGIS)
Ecological factor ranges of C. sativus L
| Biologically meaningful variables | Biological range | Biological mean | Biological Std Dev |
|---|---|---|---|
| BIO1 = annual mean temperature/°C | 2.8–26.3 | 13.5 | 4.5 |
| BIO2 = mean diurnal range (mean of monthly)/°C | 5.6–16.7 | 11.3 | 2.8 |
| BIO3 = isothermality (BIO2/BIO7) (*100)/°C | 2.6–4.2 | 3.6 | 0.4 |
| BIO4 = temperature seasonality (standard deviation * 100) | 405.5–973.9 | 688.1 | 129.8 |
| BIO5 = max temperature of warmest month/°C | 15.9–42.7 | 30.2 | 6.0 |
| BIO6 = min temperature of coldest month/°C | − 13.7–9.5 | -6.0 | 4.5 |
| BIO7 = temperature annual range (BIO5–BIO6)/°C | 16.6–42.8 | 30.1 | 6.0 |
| BIO8 = mean temperature of wettest quarter/°C | − 2.9–21.4 | 11.5 | 5.4 |
| BIO9 = mean temperature of driest quarter/°C | 0.8–34.3 | 19.5 | 8.8 |
| BIO10 = mean temperature of warmest quarter/°C | 11.1–35.3 | 22.4 | 5.0 |
| BIO11 = mean temperature of coldest quarter/°C | 2.8–26.3 | 13.5 | 4.5 |
| BIO12 = annual precipitation/mm | 58–1400 | 502.8 | 299.7 |
| BIO13 = precipitation of wettest month/mm | 13–226 | 67.2 | 32.6 |
| BIO14 = precipitation of driest month/mm | 0–93 | 19.2 | 22.8 |
| BIO15 = precipitation seasonality (coefficient of variation) | 8–124 | 47.5 | 28.5 |
| BIO16 = precipitation of wettest quarter/mm | 35–621 | 180.0 | 93.6 |
| BIO17 = precipitation of driest quarter/mm | 0–306 | 71.6 | 73.4 |
| BIO18 = precipitation of warmest quarter/mm | 0–321 | 86.5 | 86.1 |
| BIO19 = precipitation of coldest quarter/mm | 27–621 | 144.2 | 91.0 |
| BIO20 = solar radiation/kJ m−2 day−1 (by calculation) | 8628.6–19,770.5 | 15,603.9 | 2610.0 |
| BIO21 = water vapor pressure/kPa (by calculation) | 0.4–1.5 | 1.0 | 0.2 |
Fig. 2Violin plots of ecological factor ranges of the species
Fig. 3Potential distribution region analysis for Crocus sativus L. based on the Global Medicinal Plant Geographic Information System (GMPGIS) results. (Ecologically suitable distribution regions originated in ArcGIS 10.4, The GADM database of Global Administrative Areas 2.0 can be downloaded from http://www.gadm.org.)
Fig. 4Areas with maximum ecological similarity of potential distribution primarily include the United States, Canada and Australia, etc
Fig. 5Analysis using GMPGIS showed that the Chongming Island in Shanghai, China is a potential region for introduction and distribution
Fig. 6a Regions of successful introduction in California, Missouri, the District of Columbia and Connecticut, USA. b Other regions of successful introduction in Tasmania, Australia