ArticleEcology and evolution2016
Positive and negative effects of mesograzers on early-colonizing species in an intertidal rocky-shore community.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2016. 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.
- Chromosome-level genome assembly of the common chiton,GigaByte (Hong Kong, China) · 2024Article
- More than What Meets the Eye: Differential Spatiotemporal Distribution of Cryptic Intertidal Bangiales.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Context-dependent functional dispersion across similar ranges of trait space covered by intertidal rocky shore communities.Ecology and evolution · 2017Article
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
The ecological consequences of human-driven overexploitation and loss of keystone consumers are still unclear. In intertidal rocky shores over the world, the decrease of keystone macrograzers has resulted in an increase in the dominance of herbivores with smaller body (i.e., "mesograzers"), which could potentially alter community assembly and structure. Here, we experimentally tested whether mesograzers affect the structure of rocky intertidal communities during the period of early colonization after the occurrence of a disturbance. A manipulative field experiment was conducted to exclude mesograzers (i.e., juvenile chitons, small snails, amphipods, and juvenile limpets) from experimental areas in an ecosystem characterized by the overexploitation of keystone macrograzers and predators. The results of multivariate analyses suggest that mesograzers had significant effects on intertidal community structure through negative and positive effects on species abundances. Mesograzers had negative effects on filamentous algae, but positive effects on opportunistic foliose algae and barnacles. Probably, mesograzers indirectly favored the colonization of barnacles and foliose algae by removing preemptive competitors, as previously shown for other meso- and macrograzer species. These results strongly support the idea that small herbivores exert a firm controlling effect on the assembly process of natural communities. Therefore, changes in functional roles of top-down controllers might have significant implications for the structure of intertidal communities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.