SynthesisBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2025
Measuring juvenile habitat quality for fishes and invertebrates.
Synthesis in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 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.
- In A Class of Their Own: Multiclass Random Forests Reveal Distinct Habitat Needs of Fledglings Relative to Adults in Two Grassland Birds.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Identifying the role of marine and estuarine habitats in supporting fish and invertebrate populations during vulnerable juvenile life stages is essential to achieve effective conservation and fisheries management. There remains general agreement that: (i) the quality of juvenile habitat is best measured as the contribution of juveniles to adult populations (here "juvenile-adult contribution") and (ii) this contribution may be measured directly or inferred from habitat-specific abundance, growth and survival. Obtaining effective estimates of juvenile habitat quality using these four metrics, however, is challenging. Through a systematic review of approaches to measure juvenile habitat quality, we critically evaluate current abilities to identify key habitats and provide recommendations for future work. We found that research in this area remains dominated by measurements of abundance (85% of studies) and, to a lesser extent growth (51% of studies), with limitations in the spatiotemporal resolution and extent of sampling. Relatively few approaches are available to measure survival and juvenile-adult contribution. Knowledge of juvenile habitat quality is further limited by restricted coverage of geographic areas, taxonomic groups and habitats. Based on our analysis of 874 studies over the past ca. 50 years, we provide five recommendations for enabling juvenile habitat research to support fisheries and conservation management better in future.
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.