Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22766844›Full record

ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2012

Evaluation of sampling sizes on the intertidal macroinfauna assessment in a subtropical mudflat of Hong Kong.

Ping-Ping Shen, Hong Zhou, Zhenye Zhao, Xiao-Zhang Yu, Ji-Dong Gu

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

5 authors.

Ping-Ping ShenKey Laboratory of Marine-Bioresources Sustainable Utilization, South China Sea Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
Hong Zhou
Zhenye Zhao
Xiao-Zhang Yu
Ji-Dong Gu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, two types of sediment cores with different diameters were used to collect sediment samples from an intertidal mudflat in Hong Kong to investigate the influence of sampling unit on the quantitative assessment of benthic macroinfaunal communities. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were employed to detect differences in sampling efficiencies by the two samplers through total abundance and biomass, species richness and diversity, community structure, relative abundance of major taxa of the infaunal community. The species-area curves were further compared to find out the influence of the sampling units. Results showed that the two sampling devices provided similar information on the estimates of species diversity, density and species composition of the benthos in main part of the mudflat where the sediment was fine and homogenous; but at the station which contained coarse sand and gravels, the significant differences were detected between the quantitative assessments of macrobenthic infauna by the two samplers. Most importantly, the species-area curves indicated that more and smaller samples were better in capturing more species than less large ones when comparing an equal sampling area. Therefore, the efficiency of the sampler largely depended on the sediment properties, and sampling devices must be chosen based on the physical conditions and desired levels of precision on the organisms of the sampling program.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnnelidaBiodiversityBiomassBivalviaCrustaceaEcosystemEnvironmental MonitoringEvaluation Studies as TopicGastropodaGeologic SedimentsHong KongMultivariate AnalysisPolychaetaSample Size

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.