ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2012
Evaluation of sampling sizes on the intertidal macroinfauna assessment in a subtropical mudflat of Hong Kong.
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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distribution, diversity and abundance of bacterial laccase-like genes in different particle size fractions of sediments in a subtropical mangrove ecosystem.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2015Article
- Relationship between land use pattern and the structure and diversity of soil meso-micro arthropod community.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2014Article
- High incidence of plasmids in marine Vibrio species isolated from Mai Po Nature Reserve of Hong Kong.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2012Article
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
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
Identifiers
22766844What 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.