ArticlePloS one2021
The evaluation of biological indices to assess the condition of hillslope seep wetlands in the Tsitsa River Catchment, South Africa.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increase in the degradation of wetlands globally has highlighted the need to assess their ecological condition. Hillslope seep wetlands are among the least studied wetland types, yet they the most vulnerable because of their small size and steep slopes. Human pressure and the vulnerable nature of these wetlands requires wetland assessment tools to assess their condition. This study sought to evaluate the performance of the Floristic Quality Assessment Index for all species (FQAIall), the FQAI for dominant species (FQAIdom), and the Floristic Assessment Quotient for Wetlands (FAQWet) in response to the Anthropogenic Activity Index (AAI) and WET-Health in eleven hillslope seep wetlands and used these indices to assess the degree and intensity of disturbance. Vegetation samples were collected in summer 2016 and winter 2017. All assessment indices, FQAIall, FQAIdom, FAQWet and WET-Health, showed that hillslope seep wetlands were impacted by human activities. FQAIall showed the strongest response to AAI in winter, while FAQWet showed the strongest response to WET-Health. To the best of our knowledge, researchers in South Africa have used only WET-Health to assess wetland condition, and this is the first study to assess the condition of hillslope seep wetlands using a combination of indices (FQAIall, FQAIdom, FAQWet, and WET-Health). Overall, the findings of this study suggest that FQAIall and FAQWet are potentially better tools for assessing the biological condition of hillslope seep wetlands in South Africa.
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.