ArticleThe Science of the total environment2019
A unified approach for protecting listed species and ecosystem services in isolated wetlands using community-level protection goals.
Article in The Science of the total environment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comprehensive ecosystem analysis of two small, urban wetlands from Costa Rica.Biodiversity data journal · 2025Article
- A probabilistic approach to chronic effects assessments for listed species in a vernal pool case study.Integrated environmental assessment and management · 2024Article
- A multi-scale approach for identification of potential pesticide use sites impacting vernal pool critical habitat in California.The Science of the total environment · 2023Article
- Investigating Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Exposure to Organophosphate Pesticides: Implications for Population-Level Risk Assessment.Ecologies · 2022Article
- A sensitivity analysis of pesticide concentrations in California Central Valley vernal pools.Environmental pollution (Barking, Essex : 1987) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The protection of listed species through the Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA) process is encumbered by the number and diversity of species that need protection and the limited data available to inform assessments. Ecological communities within isolated ecosystems often contain a number of biologically diverse endemic, endangered, and threatened species, as well as providing numerous ecosystem services (ES). We propose an approach that develops community-level protection goals using isolated wetlands that includes both listed species and Service Providing Units (SPUs) that drive ES for ecological risk assessments (ERAs). Community-level protection goals are achieved by developing a protection community and weighing lines of evidence to determine a set of focal species within that community upon which to base the assessment. Lines of evidence include chemical mechanism of action, likely routes of exposure, and taxa susceptibility, as well as relationships among species, and other ecological factors. We demonstrate the process using case studies of chlorpyrifos in California vernal pools and coal ash effluent in Carolina bays. In the California vernal pool case study, listed species were the primary SPUs for the ES provided by the critical habitat. The weight of evidence demonstrated the honey bee as the focal species for the terrestrial environment and the vernal pool fairy shrimp as the focal species for the aquatic environment. The protection community within the Carolina bay case study was more taxonomically diverse than vernal pools for both listed species and SPUs, with amphibians identified as the focal species for which to target mitigation goals and hazard levels. The approach presented here will reduce the time and resource investment required for assessment of risk to listed species and adds an ES perspective to demonstrate value of assessments beyond listed species concerns.
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.