ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2026
Rethinking aquatic bioindicators: testate amoebae versus metazoans in plankton samples for assessing anthropogenic impacts on freshwater ecosystems.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Freshwater ecosystems are globally threatened, necessitating effective biomonitoring. Planktonic metazoans are key bioindicators; however, the potential of protists within the zooplankton community remains largely overlooked. We assessed the relative contribution of testate amoebae to net-zooplankton richness and density across a hydrodynamic gradient, comparing 34 lentic environments (reservoirs) with 44 lotic environments (from first- to sixth-order rivers) from a large geographic scale in Brazil. We tested the hypotheses that (i) Metazoans (rotifers, cladocerans, and copepods) would dominate in lentic systems and (ii) the contribution of testate amoebae would be greater in lotic systems, showing an inverse relationship with river order due to the exchange of fauna between compartments. The first hypothesis was confirmed, with conventional zooplankton increasing in reservoirs. The second was partially supported, while testate amoebae richness and density peaked in intermediate-order rivers, their relative contribution to the entire community was highest in lower order streams (exceeding 90%) and decreased to a maximum of 20% in larger rivers and reservoirs. Our study demonstrated that lotic ecosystems show a remarkable relative contribution of testate amoebae in plankton samples, compared with other zooplanktonic groups. Our findings emphasize the importance of incorporating protists, at least testate amoebae, into ecological assessment and river monitoring, conservation, and restoration programs. Further research is needed to elucidate how testate amoebae (and other protists) respond to different anthropogenic stressors, ideally through functional approaches and multicommunity analyses.
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.