ArticleNeotropical entomology2024
Do Methodological Differences in Experiments with Stream Shredders Imply Variability in Outputs? A Microcosm Approach.
Article in Neotropical entomology, 2024. 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
Abstract
Experiments are useful scientific tools for testing hypotheses by manipulating variables of interest while controlling for other factors that can bias or confuse the results and their interpretation. To ensures accuracy and reproducibility, experiments must have transparent and repeatable methodologies. Due to the importance of shredder invertebrates in organic matter processing, carbon cycling, and nutrient cycling, we tested experimentally the effect of different methodological approaches in microcosm experiments on the consumption and survival of shredders. We found that the shredder species, the presence or absence of the case, and the use or non-use of air-pumps in the microcosms did not affect shredder performance (i.e., consumption and survival). Furthermore, the type of water (stream or bottled) did not affect shredder performance. On the other hand, the amount of light had a negative effect on shredder performance, with constant light (i.e., 24 h) reducing shredder consumption and survival. Our results demonstrate that the use of different methodologies does not always result in changes in outcomes, thus ensuring comparability. However, luminosity is a critical factor that deserves attention when conducting microcosm experiments. Our findings provide valuable insights that can assist researchers in designing experiments with shredders from neotropical streams and conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38656588What 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.