ArticleScientific reports2024
Discovering the ecological structure of different macrophyte groups in rivers using non-parametric and parametric multivariate ordination techniques.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ecological Response of Pondweeds (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exploring the relationships between macrophyte groups and environmental conditions in lake ecosystems.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper analyses various methods of ecological ordering that are often used in modelling the relationship between vegetation and habitat. The results of direct gradient ordination by Canonical correspondence analysis (CCA), which is based on correlation, were compared with Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS), which is based on rank analyses. Both tools were also compared with Detrended correspondence analysis (DCA), which is a popular indirect gradient analysis method. The macrophyte assessment was conducted at 98 river locations in the lowland regions of Poland. Each of the surveyed locations falls within a consistent abiotic category: small to medium-sized lowland rivers with a sandy bottom. Habitat elements analysed included limnological variables and geographic parameters, and the botanical survey focused on submerged macrophytes, including vascular plants, as well as bryophytes and algae. Firstly, it was shown that various analytical tools for determining the importance of ecological factors (Monte Carlo test, BIOENV) identify slightly different significant factors responsible for the development of macrophytes in rivers. Secondly, considerable similarity was found in the structure of macrophyte communities generated on NMDS and DCA biplots, while macrophyte communities were presented very differently based on CCA. Thirdly, the ecological preferences of aquatic plants based on one-dimensional analyses primarily reflected the results of CCA, whereas they did not always follow the ecological pattern revealed by NMDS. Finally, by conducting separate studies for non-vascular plants and vascular macrophytes, it was confirmed that different ecological drivers are responsible for the development of particular groups of macrophytes.
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.