Morphometric variability of Carabidae as an indicator of ecological restoration of revitalized habitats in the European important protected landscape area of the Danube floodplains.

Vladimír Langraf, Kornélia Petrovičová, Viktor Brygadyrenko

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Vladimír LangrafDepartment of Zoology and Anthropology, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Informatics, Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, Nitra, Slovakia.

Kornélia PetrovičováFaculty of Agrobiology and Food Resources, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Nitra, Slovakia.

Viktor BrygadyrenkoDepartment of Parasitology and Veterinary Expertise, Dnipro State Agrarian and Economic University, Dnipro, Dnipropetrovsk Region, Ukraine.ORCID 0000-0002-9448-8232

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Revitalization measures currently represent an important tool in ecological practice for the recovery of disturbed habitats, and their effectiveness is increasingly assessed using bioindicator groups, including ground beetles (Carabidae). Between 2020 and 2023, we conducted research in the European habitat of the Danube Floodplains, where we evaluated the impact of revitalization measures on ground beetle assemblages. The study was carried out at 15 study sites representing eight habitat types. At each site, five pitfall traps were installed in a linear arrangement. In total, 5,292 individuals belonging to 47 species were analyzed, with a mean ellipsoid biovolume of 192 mm

Indexed as

ColeopteraConservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemEnvironmental Restoration and RemediationAnimalsBiodiversityEuropeForestsCarabidaeEllipsoid biovolumeFloodplain forestGround beetle assemblagesMorphometric variabilityNeural networksPoplar nursery

Identifiers

PMID42542869

DOI10.7717/peerj.21556

PMCPMC13428545

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.