ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2025
Numerical and functional response of phagotrophic aquatic protists: the ideal experiment-and why we cannot get it.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2025. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Protists are paramount for biogeochemical cycling in every aquatic ecosystem due to their vast population sizes and physiological versatility. Numerical response (NR) and functional response (FR) experiments are cornerstones of trait-based functional ecology and are increasingly studied experimentally with phagotrophic aquatic protists. Such experiments provide estimates of protist growth, production and consumption rates in relation to biotic (food supply) and abiotic variables (e.g., temperature, pH, and salinity) that can be used in mathematical models of ecosystem dynamics. Until now, NR and FR experiments lack standardization and are subject to potential pitfalls that received little attention in the literature. It is a common misconception that an experimental investigation of a phagotrophic protist's growth and ingestion rates represents a single experiment with replication. I demonstrate that a typical NR or FR experiment consists of a series of individual experiments in which not only the experimental target variable (food, i.e., prey abundance or biomass) changes but also other factors (physiological conditions of prey and predator, nutrient levels, unwanted contaminants) vary that may affect the experimental outcome. Standardizing all variables affecting a series of NR and FR experiments is virtually impossible. I further explain why FR experiments are more prone to experimental bias than NR experiments. Since it is principally impossible to perform an "ideal" NR or FR experiment, fulfilling all criteria of experimental standardization, the goal is to reduce the "noise" to obtain statistically significant and reproducible results. To this end, I provide guidelines that may help achieve this goal in future studies.
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.