ArticleScientific reports2026
Ecological flow guarantee rate along the Xijiang River mainstream at different scales based on multiple probability distributions.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Ecological flow is a key determinant of river ecosystem stability. Under climate change and increasing human activities, accurate quantification of ecological flow is increasingly important. Using hydrological observations from four stations, Tian’e, Qianjiang, Wuxuan, and Wuzhou, ecological flow was quantified for the Xijiang River mainstream. To address runoff nonstationarity driven by climate change and human activities, this study calibrated a random forest model using meteorological driving factors from the natural period and applied it to simulate quasi-natural runoff during the change period. The simulation results supported the assumption that the climate runoff relationship in the natural period was transferable for quasi-natural runoff reconstruction. This study used the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test, Anderson-Darling (A-D) test and Chi-Square (C-S) test to evaluate five probability distributions to determine the optimal distribution of monthly ecological flow estimates. Then, the month-by-month frequency method was used to calculate the monthly ecological flow of each site at 90% guarantee rate, and the Tennant method was used to evaluate the rationality of the flow in each period of the year. The optimal fitting distribution was mainly the Generalized Extreme Value (GEV) and the P-III distribution. After runoff change points, ecological flow guarantee rates decreased during the change period relative to the natural period, with larger declines at the Tian’e and Qianjiang stations in the upper reaches of the basin and the most pronounced reductions during the flood season from July to October. These findings inform ecological flow management in the Xijiang River Basin by identifying priority reaches and sensitive months, and they provide a transferable framework for assessing ecological flows in regulated river systems to support sustainable freshwater ecosystem protection and water resources management.
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.