Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37883482›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Zooplankton-phytoplankton biomass and diversity relationships in the Great Lakes.

Katya E Kovalenko, Euan D Reavie, Stephanie Figary, Lars G Rudstam, James M Watkins, Anne Scofield, Christopher T Filstrup

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Katya E KovalenkoNatural Resources Research Institute, University of Minnesota, Duluth, MN, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7363-212X
Euan D ReavieNatural Resources Research Institute, University of Minnesota, Duluth, MN, United States of America.
Stephanie FigaryDepartment of Natural Resources and Cornell Biological Field Station, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4876-9850
Lars G RudstamDepartment of Natural Resources and Cornell Biological Field Station, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3732-6368
James M WatkinsDepartment of Natural Resources and Cornell Biological Field Station, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United States of America.
Anne ScofieldU.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL, United States of America.
Christopher T FilstrupNatural Resources Research Institute, University of Minnesota, Duluth, MN, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3812-2831
Cornell University · USUniversity of Minnesota, Duluth · USEnvironmental Protection Agency · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantifying the relationship between phytoplankton and zooplankton may offer insight into zooplankton sensitivity to shifting phytoplankton assemblages and the potential impacts of producer-consumer decoupling on the rest of the food web. We analyzed 18 years (2001-2018) of paired phytoplankton and zooplankton samples collected as part of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Great Lakes Biology Monitoring Program to examine both the long-term and seasonal relationships between zooplankton and phytoplankton across all five Laurentian Great Lakes. We also analyzed effects of phytoplankton diversity on zooplankton biomass, diversity, and predator-prey (zooplanktivore/grazer) ratios. Across the Great Lakes, there was a weak positive correlation between total algal biovolume and zooplankton biomass in both spring and summer. The relationship was weaker and not consistently positive within individual lakes. These trends were consistent over time, providing no evidence of increasing decoupling over the study period. Zooplankton biomass was weakly negatively correlated with algal diversity across lakes, whereas zooplankton diversity was unaffected. These relationships did not change when we considered only the edible phytoplankton fraction, possibly due to the high correlation between total and edible phytoplankton biovolume in most of these lakes. Lack of strong coupling between these producer and consumer assemblages may be related to lagging responses by the consumers, top-down effects from higher-level consumers, or other confounding factors. These results underscore the difficulty in predicting higher trophic level responses, including zooplankton, from changes in phytoplankton assemblages.

Indexed as

PhytoplanktonZooplanktonAnimalsBiomassFood ChainLakes

Identifiers

PMID37883482
PMCPMC10602272
OpenAlexW4387966237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.