ArticlePloS one2023
Spatial variability of the Po River food web and its comparison with the Danube River food web.
Article in PloS one, 2023. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Freshwater ecosystems are experiencing unprecedented pressure globally. To address environmental challenges, systematic and comparative studies on ecosystems are needed, though mostly lacking, especially for rivers. Here, we describe the food web of the Po River (as integrated from the white literature and monitoring data), describe the three river sections using network analysis, and compare our results with the previously compiled Danube River food web. The Po River food web was taxonomically aggregated in five consecutive steps (T1-T5) and it was also analyzed using the regular equivalence (REGE) algorithm to identify structurally similar nodes in the most aggregated T5 model. In total, the two river food webs shared 30 nodes. Two network metrics (normalized degree centrality [nDC]) and normalized betweenness centrality [nBC]) were compared using Mann-Whitney tests in the two rivers. On average, the Po River nodes have larger nDC values than in the Danube, meaning that neighboring connections are better mapped. Regarding nBC, there were no significant differences between the two rivers. Finally, based on both centrality indices, Carassius auratus is the most important node in the Po River food web, whereas phytoplankton and detritus are most important in the Danube River. Using network analysis and comparative methods, it is possible to draw attention to important trophic groups and knowledge gaps, which can guide future research. These simple models for the Po River food web can pave the way for more advanced models, supporting quantitative and predictive-as well as more functional-descriptions of ecosystems.
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.