ArticlePloS one2025
Towards a more integrative environmental assessment: Infauna as tool for Zostera marina conservation management.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Seagrasses are highly sensitive to human-induced disturbances and global environmental changes. Since the 1980s, Zostera marina meadows along the West Swedish coast (Skagerrak) have declined significantly, as evidenced by changes in morpho-anatomical traits, reductions in area coverage, and shifts in associated communities. However, infaunal assemblages within Z. marina meadows remain understudied compared to epifaunal communities and have not been previously used as indicators of seagrass regression. To investigate spatial variability in infaunal composition, we analysed samples from 15 coastal stations at depths of 1.5-3 m depth. Using an n-dimensional hypervolume framework, we assessed functional differences between infaunal and epifaunal communities. We examined infaunal community descriptors-such as species richness and individual abundance-biotic indices, environmental drivers (including wave exposure and Z. marina biomass), and correlations with epifauna. Variability in infaunal composition across sampling stations was primarily driven by differences in the abundance of dominant taxa, including the polychaete Capitella capitata, oligochaetes, nematodes, and chironomids. Several coastal stations, such as Marstrand and Finsbo, were classified as moderately polluted, though biotic indices, i.e., AMBI, M-AMBI and ISI, showed discrepancies. Spatial patterns in infaunal assemblages were mainly influenced by Z. marina biomass and maximum fetch, with a good representation of oligochaetes and chironomids in exposed stations. These findings suggest that infauna respond differently from epifauna but provide valuable additional insights into the ecological status, functional traits, and trophic diversity of Z. marina meadows. Integrating multiple community components is essential for a more comprehensive understanding of the processes and patterns driving seagrass ecosystem regression.
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.