ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2015
Temporal variation of phytoplankton growth and grazing loss in the west coast of Peninsular Malaysia.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temporal drivers of abundance and community structure of scyphozoan jellyfish in tropical coastal waters.PeerJ · 2025Article
- Effects of eutrophication on diatom abundance, biovolume and diversity in tropical coastal waters.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2017Article
- Synechococcus production and grazing loss rates in nearshore tropical waters.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2017Article
- Response of marine copepods to a changing tropical environment: winners, losers and implications.PeerJ · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Phytoplankton growth (μ) and grazing loss (g) rates were measured monthly by the Landry-Hassett dilution method over a 2-year period at both estuarine (Klang) and coastal water (Port Dickson) systems along the Straits of Malacca. Chlorophyll a (Chl a) concentration ranged from 0.20 to 4.47 μg L(-1) at Klang except on two occasions when Chl a spiked above 10 μg L(-1). In contrast, Chl a concentrations were relatively stable at Port Dickson (0.14 to 2.76 μg L(-1)). From the rate measurements, μ was higher (t = 2.01, df = 43, p < 0.05) at Klang (0.30 to 2.26 day(-1)) than at Port Dickson (0.18 to 1.66 day(-1)), but g was not significantly different (p > 0.80). g ranged from 0.30 to 1.50 and 0.21 to 1.51 day(-1) at Klang and Port Dickson, respectively. In this study, grazing loss was coupled to phytoplankton growth, and the ratio of g/μ or grazing pressure which estimates the proportion of primary production grazed was 50% at Klang and lower than at Port Dickson (68%; t = 2.213, df = 36, p < 0.05). We found that the higher growth rates in a eutrophic system, i.e., Klang, were not matched by higher grazing loss, and this may have implications for the biogeochemical cycling in coastal waters.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25864082What 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.