Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34556829›Full record

ReviewNature ecology & evolution2021

Refocusing multiple stressor research around the targets and scales of ecological impacts.

Benno I Simmons, Penelope S A Blyth, Julia L Blanchard, Tom Clegg, Eva Delmas, Aurélie Garnier, Christopher A Griffiths, Ute Jacob, Frank Pennekamp, Owen L Petchey and 3 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature ecology & evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Impacts of pollution on the soil microbiome.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. New York State Climate Impacts Assessment Chapter 05: Ecosystems.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Benno I SimmonsDepartment of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. benno.simmons@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2751-9430
Penelope S A BlythDepartment of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Julia L BlanchardCentre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0532-4824
Tom CleggDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Ascot, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8381-3132
Eva DelmasDépartement de Sciences Biologiques, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Aurélie GarnierDepartment of Aquatic Resources, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Öregrund, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3712-4301
Christopher A GriffithsDepartment of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7203-0426
Ute JacobAlfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Bremerhaven, Germany.
Frank PennekampDepartment of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0679-1045
Owen L PetcheyDepartment of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7724-1633
Timothée PoisotDépartement de Sciences Biologiques, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Thomas J WebbDepartment of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3183-8116
Andrew P BeckermanDepartment of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4797-9143

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecological communities face a variety of environmental and anthropogenic stressors acting simultaneously. Stressor impacts can combine additively or can interact, causing synergistic or antagonistic effects. Our knowledge of when and how interactions arise is limited, as most models and experiments only consider the effect of a small number of non-interacting stressors at one or few scales of ecological organization. This is concerning because it could lead to significant underestimations or overestimations of threats to biodiversity. Furthermore, stressors have been largely classified by their source rather than by the mechanisms and ecological scales at which they act (the target). Here, we argue, first, that a more nuanced classification of stressors by target and ecological scale can generate valuable new insights and hypotheses about stressor interactions. Second, that the predictability of multiple stressor effects, and consistent patterns in their impacts, can be evaluated by examining the distribution of stressor effects across targets and ecological scales. Third, that a variety of existing mechanistic and statistical modelling tools can play an important role in our framework and advance multiple stressor research.

Indexed as

Anthropogenic EffectsEcosystemBiodiversityBiota

Identifiers

PMID34556829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.