ArticleMolecular ecology2018
The effects of pastoral intensification on the feeding interactions of generalist predators in streams.
Article in Molecular ecology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A novel biological sources consistency evaluation method reveals high level of biodiversity within wild natural medicine: A case study ofActa pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2023Article
- Seasonal and ontological variation in diet and age-related differences in prey choice, by an insectivorous songbird.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Insights into aphid prey consumption by ladybirds: Optimising field sampling methods and primer design for high throughput sequencing.PloS one · 2020Article
- Molecular diet analysis finds an insectivorous desert bat community dominated by resource sharing despite diverse echolocation and foraging strategies.Ecology and evolution · 2019Article
- New universal ITS2 primers for high-resolution herbivory analyses using DNA metabarcoding in both tropical and temperate zones.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- The effects of pastoral intensification on the feeding interactions of generalist predators in streams.Molecular ecology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Land-use change can alter trophic interactions with wide-ranging functional consequences, yet the consequences for aquatic food webs have been little studied. In part, this may reflect the challenges of resolving the diets of aquatic organisms using classical gut contents analysis, especially for soft-bodied prey. We used next-generation sequencing to resolve prey use in nearly 400 individuals of two predatory invertebrates (the Caddisfly, Rhyacophila dorsalis, and the Stonefly Dinocras cephalotes) in streams draining land with increasingly intensive livestock farming. Rhyacophila dorsalis occurred in all streams, whereas D. cephalotes was restricted to low intensities, allowing us to test whether: (i) apparent sensitivity to agriculture in the latter species reflects a more specialized diet and (ii) diet in R. dorsalis varied between sites with and without D. cephalotes. DNA was extracted from dissected gut contents, amplified without blocking probes and sequenced using Ion Torrent technology. Both predators were generalists, consuming 30 prey taxa with a preference for taxa that were abundant in all streams or that increased with intensification. Where both predators were present, their diets were nearly identical, and R. dorsalis's diet was virtually unchanged in the absence of D. cephalotes. The loss of D. cephalotes from more intensive sites was probably due to physicochemical stressors, such as sedimentation, rather than to dietary specialization, although wider biotic factors (e.g., competition with other predatory taxa) could not be excluded. This study provides a uniquely detailed description of predator diets along a land-use intensity gradient, offering new insights into how anthropogenic stressors affect stream 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.