ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2019
Zooplankton changes during bottom-up and top-down control due to sustainable restoration in a shallow urban lake.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 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.
- Spatio-temporal variations in water quality of a river-lake system during restoration treatments.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2022Article
- The relationship between zooplankton community and environmental factors of Ghrib Dam in Algeria.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the trophic status in three reservoirs in Algeria (north west) using physicochemical analysis and rotifers structure.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
- Effects of juvenile crucian carp (Carassius carassius) removal on submerged macrophyte growth-implications for subtropical shallow lake restoration.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Article
- A small omnivorous bitterling fish (Acheilognathus macropterus) facilitates dominance of cyanobacteria, rotifers and Limnodrilus in an outdoor mesocosm experiment.Environmental science and pollution research international · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Long-term cyanobacterial blooms and hypereutrophic state have been typical for the shallow, urban Swarzędzkie Lake for many years. Diversion of sewage did not change its trophic status, so restoration began in autumn 2011 using the sustainable approach based on three methods. The aim of the study was to analyse how sustainable restoration affects zooplankton. We hypothesised that bottom-up and top-down methods reconstructed zooplankton composition. Thus, the abundance of large-size cladocerans increased and controlled phytoplankton effectively. The elimination of cyanobacteria bloom, the decrease of rotifer abundance and the twofold increase of filter-feeder effectiveness were observed in summer 2012. However, high phosphorus concentration, lack of regular cyprinid removal and insufficient fish stocking together with high temperature prevented zooplankton from controlling cyanobacteria bloom in summer 2013. Rotifer domination with high trophy species was noted, as before restoration. The number of rotifers decreased in 2014, while crustaceans increased due to the significant decrease of nutrient concentrations and an intensification of biomanipulation treatments. Therefore, summer phytoplankton growth was low, without cyanobacteria dominance. The rebuilding of zooplankton in Swarzędzkie Lake was observed during sustainable restoration. However, the treatments should be intensified when adverse changes were observed to obtain better results for the improvement of water quality.
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.