Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41459101›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2025

Development of a Trait-Based Risk Assessment to Minimise the Impacts of Trout on New Zealand Native Fishes.

Ami Coughlan, Adam D Canning, Russell G Death

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Ami CoughlanSchool of Natural Sciences - Ecology Massey University Palmerston North New Zealand.
Adam D CanningWellington Fish and Game Council Palmerston North New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8813-2240
Russell G DeathSchool of Natural Sciences - Ecology Massey University Palmerston North New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8019-8448

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The management of introduced species to protect native fauna in the face of their rapid decline often presents a costly, technically complex, and sometimes socially controversial challenge. Prioritising when and where conservation efforts are best applied for the greatest efficacy is difficult. Using a systematic risk assessment framework effectively prioritises options among the range of management alternatives. Tensions exist between managing trout in New Zealand as a highly valued sport fishery and conserving native freshwater fish populations. We developed a trait-based risk assessment matrix to identify the native fish most vulnerable to trout pressures and prioritise river reaches where those species are abundant for conservation focus. The trait-based assessment indicated that all species identified as highly vulnerable to trout pressures were either non-migratory galaxiids or mudfish. Trout overlapped in occurrence with approximately 10% of the entire extent of species deemed high risk to trout pressures, equating to 1626 km of river length, largely in central Otago and Hawkes Bay. While 1626 km of river is small compared to the entire riverine network (0.4%), it is still a substantial area for resource conservation interventions. Improving habitat quality to bolster native fish resilience to trout pressures, removing or reducing trout abundance are, however, potentially effective options. The approach adopted here will allow conservation managers to direct these actions to areas where they result in the greatest likelihood of positive outcomes.

Indexed as

fish conservationintroduced species managementNew ZealandOncorhynchus mykissrisk assessmentSalmo trutta

Identifiers

PMID41459101
PMCPMC12742463

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.