ArticlePeerJ2021
Between darkness and light: spring habitats provide new perspectives for modern researchers on groundwater biology.
Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Living at the Interface: Behavioral, Evolutionary and Ecological Insights of Spring Use by Highly Mobile Stygobiont Crustaceans,Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- First report of Aquitalea spp. From cave aquatic environments of Roraima Tepui, Guayana highlands.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2026Article
- Light in the Darkness: Responses to Light and Diel Activity Rhythm in an Eyeless Cave Flatworm (Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Perspectives and pitfalls in preserving subterranean biodiversity through protected areas.npj biodiversity · 2024Review
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
Springs are interfaces between groundwater and surface habitats and may play an important role in the study of subterranean animals. In this systematic evidence review and meta-analysis, we explore whether observations of stygobionts in springs are relevant and more common than observations of epigean animals in groundwater. We searched the Web of Science database for papers on groundwater fauna and spring fauna. For each paper we found, we recorded whether the paper reported the occurrence of typical stygobionts in springs, of surface animals in groundwater, or of the same taxa in both habitats. If so, we recorded how many such species were reported. We also recorded the scientific discipline of each study and the year of publication. Our search yielded 342 papers. A considerable number of these papers reported stygobionts in springs: 20% of papers dealing with groundwater fauna and 16% of papers dealing with spring fauna reported the occurrence of stygobionts in spring habitats. Both the number of papers that mentioned stygobionts in springs, and the number of stygobiont species that were documented in springs, were higher than equivalent measures for the occurrence of surface fauna underground. We also detected a positive relationship between year of publication and the number of reports of stygofauna in springs. To broaden the insights from biological research on underground environments, we suggest that springs should be considered not only as simple sampling points of stygobionts but also as core stygobiont habitats.
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.