SynthesisEnvironmental toxicology and chemistry2020
What to Survey? A Systematic Review of the Choice of Biological Groups in Assessing Ecological Impacts of Metals in Running Waters.
Synthesis in Environmental toxicology and chemistry, 2020. 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, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Elevational Variation in Rhizosphere Bacterial Assembly and Fine-Scale Taxon Differentiation ofMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Variability of trace elements in bodies of scrapers (Ephemeroptera) and predators (Plecoptera) from mountain rivers of Dzungarian Alatau (Kazakhstan) and Western Carpathians (Slovakia).Environmental science and pollution research international · 2024Article
- Concordance among lacustrine communities are low and inconsistent in the conterminous United States.Oecologia · 2024Article
- Modeling the effect of improved sewage disposal rates on ecological status for aquatic organisms in Japan.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Stream Mesocosm Experiments Show no Protective Effects of Calcium on Copper Toxicity to Macroinvertebrates.Environmental toxicology and chemistry · 2022Article
- Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Which biological groups (in the present study, periphyton, macroinvertebrates, and fishes) are surveyed is a fundamental question in environmental impact assessment programs in metal-contaminated rivers. We performed a systematic review of 202 studies that investigated the ecological impacts of metal contamination on aquatic populations and communities in streams and rivers to examine 1) which biological groups were surveyed, 2) whether their responses were correlated with each other, and 3) which biological group was most responsive to changes in metal contamination level. In these studies, published from 1991 to 2015, benthic macroinvertebrates were most frequently chosen throughout the period (59-76% in different 5-yr periods), followed by periphyton and fishes, and the number of studies that surveyed at least 2 or 3 biological groups was very limited (10%). Pearson's correlation coefficients calculated between the metrics of different biological groups were often low, emphasizing the importance of investigating multiple biological groups to better understand the responses of aquatic communities to metal contamination in running waters. Despite the limited data collected, our meta-analysis showed that, in most cases, biological metrics based on macroinvertebrates were more responsive to changes in metal contamination level than those based on periphyton or fishes. This finding suggests that benthic macroinvertebrates could be a reasonable choice to detect the ecological impacts of metal contamination on a local scale. Environ Toxicol Chem 2020;39:1964-1972. © 2020 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.
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.