Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 268

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Aquatic plant diversity in riverine wetlands: the role of connectivity

Open access
Bornette, Gudrun, Amoros, Claude, Lamouroux, Nicolas·1998·Freshwater Biology

Abstract

1. The hypothesis was tested that intermediate connectivity to a river results in propagule inputs to wetlands, whereas excessive connectivity impedes recruitment, and insufficient connectivity causes less competitive species to be eliminated, with no recruitment of new species. As a consequence, very low or very high nutrient levels should decrease species richness by selecting specialized species, whereas intermediate nutrient levels should favour the co‐occurrence of species with contrasting nutrient requirements. 2. Among cut‐off channels with high sinuosity and which are infrequently flooded by the river (low flood scouring), one example possesses high species richness because most species are saved from extinction by long‐term isolation of the channel and cold groundwater supplies. Other channels are poorly supplied with groundwater and show a lower richness of species, because of low propagule inputs and low recruitment potential. 3. Cut‐off channels with low sinuosity and which are flooded at intermediate frequencies were divided into three groups. The first group was species‐poor, being closely connected to the river through downstream backflows which maintain nutrient‐rich and turbid waters, in keeping with the hypothesis. The second group presents intermediate richness caused by: (i) lower river backflows; and (ii) floods that partly scour substrate and plants, and afford regeneration niches for transported propagules. The third group was species‐poor because of excessive groundwater supplies, which probably acted as a limiting factor for species growth and recruitment. 4. The most frequently flooded channel shows the highest species richness, and occurrence of rare and fugitive species, because of floods which compensate competition by scouring sediments and plants, and afford regeneration niches for propagules. In this case, conservation of biodiversity necessitates propagule sources at the level of the river landscape.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2427.1998.00273.x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 268

Metadata

Authors
Bornette, G., Amoros, C., & Lamouroux, N.
Venue
Freshwater Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-03
Volume
39
Issue
2
Pages
267-283
ISSN
  • 0046-5070 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2427
OpenAlex
W2009121062
Cited by
268
References
0
FWCI
8.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Aquatic plant diversity in riverine wetlands: the role of connectivity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1998.00273.x
The paper
Bornette, G., Amoros, C., & Lamouroux, N. (1998). Aquatic plant diversity in riverine wetlands: the role of connectivity. Freshwater Biology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1998.00273.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.