ArticleEcology and evolution2021
The effect of sampling density and study area size on landscape genetics inferences for the Mississippi slimy salamander (
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2021. 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.
- Improving Malaria Parasite Gene Flow Inference Under Sparse Spatial Sampling.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Article
- How Large, Decayed, and Moist Must Rotting Logs Be to Act as Thermally Buffered Microhabitats in Temperate Eastern United States Forests?Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- DNA barcoding is currently unreliable for species identification in most crayfishes.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Landscape features influencing gene flow and connectivity of an endangered passerine.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- The impact of climate change on westernEcology and evolution · 2021Article
- The effect of sampling density and study area size on landscape genetics inferences for the Mississippi slimy salamander (Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In landscape genetics, it is largely unknown how choices regarding sampling density and study area size impact inferences upon which habitat features impede vs. facilitate gene flow. While it is recommended that sampling locations be spaced no further apart than the average individual's dispersal distance, for low-mobility species, this could lead to a challenging number of sampling locations, or an unrepresentative study area. We assessed the effects of sampling density and study area size on landscape genetic inferences for a dispersal-limited amphibian,
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.