The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How much water does a river need?
Abstract
1. This paper introduces a new approach for setting streamflow‐based river ecosystem management targets and this method is called the ‘Range of Variability Approach’ (RVA). The proposed approach derives from aquatic ecology theory concerning the critical role of hydrological variability, and associated characteristics of timing, frequency, duration, and rates of change, in sustaining aquatic ecosystems. The method is intended for application on rivers wherein the conservation of native aquatic biodiversity and protection of natural ecosystem functions are primary river management objectives. 2. The RVA uses as its starting point either measured or synthesized daily streamflow values from a period during which human perturbations to the hydrological regime were negligible. This streamflow record is then characterized using thirty‐two different hydrological parameters, using methods defined in Richter et al. (1996). Using the RVA, a range of variation in each of the thirty‐two parameters, e.g. the values at ± 1 standard deviation from the mean or the twenty‐fifth to seventy‐fifth percentile range, are selected as initial flow management targets. 3. The RVA targets are intended to guide the design of river management strategies (e.g. reservoir operations rules, catchment restoration) that will lead to attainment of these targets on an annual basis. The RVA will enable river managers to define and adopt readily interim management targets before conclusive, long‐term ecosystem research results are available. The RVA targets and management strategies should be adaptively refined as suggested by research results and as needed to sustain native aquatic ecosystem biodiversity and integrity.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments
Hurlbert, S. H. (1984) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/1942661 · Cited by 8,377
Cited by
Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S. R., de Vries, W., de Wit, C. A., et al. (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1259855 · Cited by 12,527
Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges
Dudgeon, D., Arthington, A. H., Gessner, M. O., Kawabata, Z., Knowler, D. J., Lévêque, C., Naiman, R. J., Prieur‐Richard, A., Soto, D., Stiassny, M. L. J., et al. (2006) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1017/s1464793105006950 · Cited by 8,489
Poff, N. L., Allan, J. D., Bain, M. B., Karr, J. R., Prestegaard, K. L., Richter, B. D., Sparks, R. E., & Stromberg, J. C. (1997) · BioScience · doi:10.2307/1313099 · Cited by 6,500
Self-citationBasic Principles and Ecological Consequences of Altered Flow Regimes for Aquatic Biodiversity
BUNN, S. E., & ARTHINGTON, A. H. (2002) · Environmental Management · doi:10.1007/s00267-002-2737-0 · Cited by 3,379
Tharme, R. E. (2003) · River Research and Applications · doi:10.1002/rra.736 · Cited by 1,638
Metadata
- Authors
- RICHTER, B., BAUMGARTNER, J., WIGINGTON, R., & BRAUN, D.
- Venue
- Freshwater Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1997-02
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 231-249
- ISSN
- 0046-5070 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2427
- OpenAlex
- W2151941169
- Cited by
- 1,601
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How much water does a river need? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1997.00153.x
- The paper
- RICHTER, B., BAUMGARTNER, J., WIGINGTON, R., & BRAUN, D. (1997). How much water does a river need? Freshwater Biology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1997.00153.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.