ArticleScientific reports2019
Aquatic ecosystem health assessment of a typical sub-basin of the Liao River based on entropy weights and a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Article
- Adaptability of water resources development and utilization to social-economy system in Hunan province, China.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Ecological River Health Assessment Using Multi-Metric Models in an Asian Temperate Region with Land Use/Land Cover as the Primary Factor Regulating Nutrients, Organic Matter, and Fish Composition.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Assessment of Spatio-Temporal Changes for Ecosystem Health: A Case Study of Hexi Corridor, Northwest China.Environmental management · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
River ecosystem health assessments provide the foundation for river ecological protection and integrated management. To evaluate the aquatic ecosystem health of the Fan River basin, benthic macroinvertebrate indices (the Multimeric Macroinvertebrates Index Flanders (MMIF) and Family Biotic Index (FBI)), a habitat index (the river habitat quality Index (RHQI)) and a water quality index (the Improved Water Pollution Index (IWPI)) were selected. The entropy weighting method was used to calculate the RHQI and IWPI. A fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method was used to evaluate the aquatic ecosystem health. The evaluation results indicated that the aquatic ecosystem health of the Fan River basin was better in 2018 than in 2011, which respectively belonged to the ends of the 11th and 12th Five-Year Plans of the Major Science and Technology Programs for Water Pollution Control and Treatment in China. The proportions of sampling stations with good, moderate and poor grades in 2011 were 50.0%, 40.0% and 10.0%, respectively, and in 2018, the proportions of stations with excellent, good and moderate grades were 20.0%, 50.0% and 30.0%, respectively. A correlation analysis showed that the RHQI was significantly correlated with the MMIF, FBI and IWPI. The riparian land use pattern was an important factor that influenced changes in the aquatic ecosystem health grade. Of the water quality parameters, total phosphorous (TP) and potassium bichromate index (COD) were the main factors that affected the characteristics of benthic macroinvertebrates and the aquatic ecosystem health.
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.