Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31240779›Full record

ArticleEcological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America2019

Drivers and spatial structure of abiotic and biotic properties of lakes, wetlands, and streams at the national scale.

Katelyn King, Kendra Spence Cheruvelil, Amina Pollard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Lake chlorophyll-a linked to upstream nutrients across the CONUS.Environmental science & technology letters · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Modeling hypolimnetic dissolved oxygen depletion using monitoring data.Canadian journal of fisheries and aquatic sciences. Journal canadien des sciences halieutiques et aquatiques · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Katelyn KingDepartment of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 48824, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5471-842X
Kendra Spence CheruvelilDepartment of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 48824, USA.
Amina PollardU.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, D.C., 20004, USA.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Broad-scale studies have improved our ability to make predictions about how freshwater biotic and abiotic properties will respond to changes in climate and land use intensification. Further, fine-scaled studies of lakes, wetlands, or streams have documented the important role of hydrologic connections for understanding many freshwater biotic and abiotic processes. However, lakes, wetlands, and streams are typically studied in isolation of one another at both fine and broad scales. Therefore, it is not known whether these three freshwater types (lakes, wetlands, and streams) respond similarly to ecosystem and watershed drivers nor how they may respond to future global stresses. In this study, we asked, do lake, wetland, and stream biotic and abiotic properties respond to similar ecosystem and watershed drivers and have similar spatial structure at the national scale? We answered this question with three U.S. conterminous data sets of freshwater ecosystems. We used random forest (RF) analysis to quantify the multi-scaled drivers related to variation in nutrients and biota in lakes, wetlands, and streams simultaneously; we used semivariogram analysis to quantify the spatial structure of biotic and abiotic properties and to infer possible mechanisms controlling the ecosystem properties of these freshwater types. We found that abiotic properties responded to similar drivers, had large ranges of spatial autocorrelation, and exhibited multi-scale spatial structure, regardless of freshwater type. However, the dominant drivers of variation in biotic properties depended on freshwater type and had smaller ranges of spatial autocorrelation. Our study is the first to document that drivers and spatial structure differ more between biotic and abiotic variables than across freshwater types, suggesting that some properties of freshwater ecosystems may respond similarly to future global changes.

Indexed as

LakesWetlandsClimateEcosystemRiversaquatic vegetationchlorophyll alakesmacroscaleNational Aquatic Resource Surveysnutrientsspatial autocorrelationspatial scalestreamswetlands

Identifiers

PMID31240779
PMCPMC7337605

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.