ArticleEcological indicators2025
Striving for consistency in a national lake assessment: defining reference status and littoral macroinvertebrate condition in lakes across the conterminous United States.
Article in Ecological indicators, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A model-based assessment of anthropogenic disturbance on lotic macroinvertebrate assemblages.Ecosphere (Washington, D.C) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Benthic macroinvertebrates are widely used for assessing lotic ecosystems, however, their use in assessing lake condition has been more limited-especially at large, continental extents. We used data collected during the U.S. EPA's National Lake Assessment between 2007-2022 to develop and validate a national macroinvertebrate multi-metric index (MMI) of lake condition across the conterminous U.S. As part of that process, we identified least-disturbed ecoregional reference lakes by filtering all sampled lakes by using specific physical, chemical, and disturbance variables to remove disturbed lakes. To account for natural variability, different criteria values were used for each of the nine national ecoregions. This allowed for a regionally explicit and reproducible definitions of lake reference condition for current and future analyses. Because of insufficient reference lake numbers in some of the nine ecoregions, macroinvertebrate MMI development was done independently for each of five aggregate national ecoregions. All 126 candidate macroinvertebrate metrics were screened for reproducibility, responsiveness, and redundancy to identify the best metric in each of six group types: composition, diversity, feeding group, habit, richness, and pollution tolerance for each ecoregion. The six chosen metrics were summed to calculate the MMI. Condition benchmarks (good/fair/poor) for assessing biological condition were defined for each ecoregion based on reference lake MMI percentiles. Using these five MMIs with the 2022 survey data, an estimated 44% of the lakes were in good condition, whereas 27% were in poor condition. Our MMIs offer managers valuable tools for assessing lakes at large ecoregional and continental extents.
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.