Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38266048›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024

Macroscale controls determine the recovery of river ecosystem productivity following flood disturbances.

Heili E Lowman, Robert K Shriver, Robert O Hall, Judson W Harvey, Philip Savoy, Charles B Yackulic, Joanna R Blaszczak

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Heili E LowmanDepartment of Natural Resources and Environmental Science, University of Nevada Reno, Reno, NV 89557.ORCID 0000-0002-2939-9225
Robert K ShriverDepartment of Natural Resources and Environmental Science, University of Nevada Reno, Reno, NV 89557.ORCID 0000-0002-4590-4834
Robert O HallDivision of Biological Sciences, Flathead Lake Biological Station, University of Montana, Polson, MT 59860.ORCID 0000-0002-0763-5346
Judson W HarveyU.S. Geological Survey, Earth System Processes Division, Reston, VA 20192.
Philip SavoyU.S. Geological Survey, Earth System Processes Division, Reston, VA 20192.
Charles B YackulicU.S. Geological Survey, Southwest Biological Science Center, Flagstaff, AZ 86001.ORCID 0000-0001-9661-0724
Joanna R BlaszczakDepartment of Natural Resources and Environmental Science, University of Nevada Reno, Reno, NV 89557.ORCID 0000-0001-5122-0829
United States Geological Survey · USUniversity of Nevada, Reno · USUniversity of Montana · US

Funding

National Science Foundation (NSF) OIA-2019528
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

River ecosystem function depends on flow regimes that are increasingly modified by changes in climate, land use, water extraction, and flow regulation. Given the wide range of variation in flow regime modifications and autotrophic communities in rivers, it has been challenging to predict which rivers will be more resilient to flow disturbances. To better understand how river productivity is disturbed by and recovers from high-flow disturbance events, we used a continental-scale dataset of daily gross primary production time series from 143 rivers to estimate growth of autotrophic biomass and ecologically relevant flow disturbance thresholds using a modified population model. We compared biomass recovery rates across hydroclimatic gradients and catchment characteristics to evaluate macroscale controls on ecosystem recovery. Estimated biomass accrual (i.e., recovery) was fastest in wider rivers with less regulated flow regimes and more frequent instances of biomass removal during high flows. Although disturbance flow thresholds routinely fell below the estimated bankfull flood (i.e., the 2-y flood), a direct comparison of disturbance flows estimated by our biomass model and a geomorphic model revealed that biomass disturbance thresholds were usually greater than bed disturbance thresholds. We suggest that primary producers in rivers vary widely in their capacity to recover following flow disturbances, and multiple, interacting macroscale factors control productivity recovery rates, although river width had the strongest overall effect. Biomass disturbance flow thresholds varied as a function of geomorphology, highlighting the need for data such as bed slope and grain size to predict how river ecosystems will respond to changing flow regimes.

Indexed as

EcosystemFloodsBiomassClimateRiversalgaedisturbanceecosystem metabolismecosystem recoveryriver

Identifiers

PMID38266048
PMCPMC10835108
OpenAlexW4391163903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.