ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2014
Monitoring fish communities in wadeable lowland streams: comparing the efficiency of electrofishing methods at contrasting fish assemblages.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2014. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electrofishing is considered a reliable tool to assess the assemblages and biodiversity of fish in wadeable streams. The most widely used electrofishing techniques (point [P], single-pass [S-P], and multiple-pass [M-P]) vary as to the effort needed for sample collection, and this may potentially influence the degree of accuracy. Moreover, little is known about the comparability of the methods and their specific performance in streams with different fish assemblages. The aim of this investigation was to validate (using M-P sampling as reference) the use of P and S-P electrofishing techniques to accurately assess the richness, density and size distribution of fishes in small streams at both regional and global scale independently of fish assemblages and geographical region. We sampled 50-m-long reaches in a total of 33 lowland stream reaches that were located in different climatic and biogeographical regions (Uruguay and Denmark) and hosted different fish assemblages. Subtropical fish communities exhibited higher richness (Uy: 12-32, Dk: 1-9) and densities (Uy: 1.3-5.2, DK: 0.1-4.9 in. m(-2)) than temperate streams. We applied both "global models" using the entire database (33 sites) and "local models" including the same number of sites but using the climatic region as a model variable. Regression analyses revealed that the P, S-P and M-P methods all provided an adequate picture of the species composition and size distribution, and transfer equations for comparison between methods are thus not required. Conversely, richness was better predicted by S-P and by P techniques for regional and global models, respectively. Transfer equations obtained for abundance revealed that the P and S-P models can accurately transform catch data into M-P estimations. The transfer equations provided here may have great relevance as they allow relatively reliable comparisons to be made between data obtained by different techniques. We also show that less intensive sampling techniques may be equally useful for monitoring purposes as those requiring more intensive efforts (and costs). We encourage validation of our developed transfer equations on data from other regions of the world.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24189756What 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.