Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40852618›Full record

ArticleBioscience2025

Waterbody connectivity: Linking science and policy for improved waterbody protection.

S Mažeika Patricio Sulliván, Robert M Hughes, Robert L Vadas, Gillian T Davies, Patrick D Shirey, Susan A R Colvin, Dana M Infante, Robert J Danehy, Nayeli K Sanchez, Robert B Keast

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

S Mažeika Patricio SullivánBaruch Institute of Coastal Ecology and Forest Science, Clemson University, Georgetown, South Carolina, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2341-5316
Robert M HughesAmnis Opes Institute and with the Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Sciences at Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1308-666X
Robert L VadasIndependent scholar in Olympia, Washington, United States.
Gillian T DaviesBSC Group, Inc., in Worcester, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9514-5138
Patrick D ShireyDepartment of Geology and Environmental Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5933-5022
Susan A R ColvinDepartment of Biological Sciences at Minnesota State University-Mankato, Mankato, Minnesota, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7170-086X
Dana M InfanteDepartment of Fisheries and Wildlife at Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States.
Robert J DanehyCatchment Aquatic Ecology, Eugene, Oregon, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0012-9010
Nayeli K SanchezBaruch Institute of Coastal Ecology and Forest Science, Clemson University, Georgetown, South Carolina, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0938-1279
Robert B KeastBaruch Institute of Coastal Ecology and Forest Science, Clemson University, Georgetown, South Carolina, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1594-4661

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Connectivity-the flows and exchanges of organisms, materials, and energy within and among watersheds-is a central paradigm in ecosystem science. Changes in those connections have consequences for ecosystem functioning and water quality downstream and upstream. Therefore, connectivity is a cornerstone for federal water protection under the United States Clean Water Act (CWA). In the present article, we review the science of connectivity, explain the history of changes in CWA jurisdiction defining waters of the United States, discuss implications for US water policy, and highlight key steps to align that policy with science. The Sackett v. EPA (2023) Supreme Court decision significantly reduced federal water protection for wetlands and headwaters, disregarding their connectivity with larger, protected waterbodies. To fulfill the goals of the CWA to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of U.S. waters, Congress must amend the act, fully recognizing the multidimensional connectivity of aquatic ecosystems and ultimately incorporating these connections into ecosystem-level policy.

Indexed as

Clean Water Actgroundwaterheadwater streamsnonperennialwetlandsWOTUS

Identifiers

PMID40852618
PMCPMC12368856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.