Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 492

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ecosystem measures of river health and their response to riparian and catchment degradation

Bunn, S. E., Davies, P. M., Mosisch, T. D.·1999·Freshwater Biology

Abstract

Summary: 1. Measurements of ecological patterns are often used as primary biological indicators of river health. However, these patterns provide little information about important stream ecosystem processes (e.g. the sources and fate of energy and nutrients). The direct measurement of these processes is considered fundamental to the determination of the health of stream and river ecosystems. 2. In this paper we used two basic approaches to assess stream ecosystem response to catchment disturbance and, particularly, to the loss of riparian vegetation in different forested biomes across Australia. Benthic gross primary production (GPP) and respiration (R24) provided measures of the amounts of organic carbon produced and consumed within the system, respectively. Stable isotope analysis was used to trace the fate of terrestrial and instream sources of organic matter in the aquatic food web. In a focal catchment in SE Queensland, additional measurements were taken of riparian attributes, catchment features and water quality. 3. Baseline measurements of GPP and R24 from undisturbed forest streams provided reference values for healthy streams for comparison with sites where the catchment or riparian vegetation had been disturbed. These values of metabolism were low by world standards in all biomes examined. Preliminary data from the Mary River catchment in SE Queensland indicated that these parameters were sensitive to variations in riparian canopy cover and, to a lesser extent, catchment clearing, and predictive models were developed. The ratio P : R (GPP : R24) was used to determine whether sites were net consumers (P < R) or producers (P > R) of carbon but this was not considered a reliable indicator of stream health on its own. 4. Although forest streams were typically net consumers of carbon (P < < R), stable isotope analysis of metazoan food webs indicated a high dependence on inconspicuous epilithic algae in some biomes. 5. A dramatic decline in the health of forest streams was observed when GPP substantially exceeded R24, especially when instream primary producers shifted from palatable unicellular algae to prolific filamentous green algae and macrophytes. These sources of instream production do not appear to enter aquatic food webs, either directly through grazing or indirectly through a detrital loop. Accumulation of these plants has led to changes in channel morphology, loss of aquatic habitat and often a major decline in water quality in some of the streams studied.

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.1365-2427.1999.00434.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 492

Metadata

Authors
Bunn, S. E., Davies, P. M., & Mosisch, T. D.
Venue
Freshwater Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1999-03
Volume
41
Issue
2
Pages
333-345
ISSN
  • 0046-5070 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2427
OpenAlex
W2079307233
Cited by
492
References
1
FWCI
12.43
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: Ecosystem measures of river health and their response to riparian and catchment degradation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1999.00434.x
The paper
Bunn, S. E., Davies, P. M., & Mosisch, T. D. (1999). Ecosystem measures of river health and their response to riparian and catchment degradation. Freshwater Biology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1999.00434.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.