Cited by 239Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyFish Ecology and Management StudiesFish biology, ecology, and behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Thresholds of freshwater biodiversity in response to riparian vegetation loss in the Neotropical region

Open access

Abstract

Protecting riparian vegetation around streams is vital in reducing the detrimental effects of environmental change on freshwater ecosystems and in maintaining aquatic biodiversity. Thus, identifying ecological thresholds is useful for defining regulatory limits and for guiding the management of riparian zones towards the conservation of freshwater biota. Using nationwide data on fish and invertebrates occurring in small Brazilian streams, we estimated thresholds of native vegetation loss in which there are abrupt changes in the occurrence and abundance of freshwater bioindicators and tested whether there are congruent responses among different biomes, biological groups and riparian buffer sizes. Mean thresholds of native vegetation cover loss varied widely among biomes, buffer sizes and biological groups: ranging from 0.5% to 77.4% for fish, from 2.9% to 37.0% for aquatic invertebrates and from 3.8% to 43.2% for a subset of aquatic invertebrates. Confidence intervals for thresholds were wide, but the minimum values of these intervals were lower for the smaller riparian buffers (50 and 100 m) than larger ones (200 and 500 m), indicating that land use should be kept away from the streams. Also, thresholds occurred at a lower percentage of riparian vegetation loss in the smaller buffers, and were critically lower for invertebrates: reducing only 6.5% of native vegetation cover within a 50‐m riparian buffer is enough to cross thresholds for invertebrates. Synthesis and applications . The high variability in biodiversity responses to loss of native riparian vegetation suggests caution in the use of a single riparian width for conservation actions or policy definitions nationwide. The most sensitive bioindicators can be used as early warning signals of abrupt changes in freshwater biodiversity. In practice, maintaining at least 50‐m wide riparian reserves on each side of streams would be more effective to protect freshwater biodiversity in Brazil. However, incentives and conservation strategies to protect even wider riparian reserves (~100 m) and also taking into consideration the regional context will promote a greater benefit. This information should be used to set conservation goals and to create complementary mechanisms and policies to protect wider riparian reserves than those currently required by the federal law.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1365-2664.13657

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Dala‐Corte, R. B., Melo, A. S., Siqueira, T., Bini, L. M., Martins, R. T., Cunico, A. M., Pes, A. M., Magalhães, A. L. B., Godoy, B. S., Leal, C. G., Monteiro‐Júnior, C. S., Stenert, C., Castro, D. M. P., Macedo, D. R., Lima‐Junior, D. P., Gubiani, É. A., Massariol, F. C., Teresa, F. B., Becker, F. G., Souza, F. N., Valente‐Neto, F., Souza, F. L., Salles, F. F., Brejão, G. L., Brito, J. G., Vitule, J. R. S., Simião‐Ferreira, J., Dias‐Silva, K., Albuquerque, L., Juen, L., Maltchik, L., Casatti, L., Montag, L., Rodrigues, M. E., Callisto, M., Nogueira, M. A. M., Santos, M. R., Hamada, N., Pamplin, P. A. Z., Pompeu, P. S., Leitão, R. P., Ruaro, R., Mariano, R., Couceiro, S. R. M., Abilhoa, V., Oliveira, V. C., Shimano, Y., Moretto, Y., Súarez, Y. R., & Roque, F. D. O.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Federal de Goiás (BR)
  • Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) (BR)
  • Departamento de Ecologia Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG) Goiânia GO Brazil
  • Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia (BR)
  • Universidade Federal do Paraná (BR)
  • Federal University of São João del-Rei (BR)
  • Universidade Federal do Pará (BR)
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • Instituto de Ciências Biológicas Universidade Federal do Pará (UFPA) Belém PA Brazil
  • Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos (BR)
  • Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução Instituto de Ciências Biológicas Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) Belo Horizonte MG Brazil
  • Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (BR)
  • Laboratório de Ecologia e Conservação de Ecossistemas Aquáticos Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT) Pontal do Araguaia MT Brazil
  • Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Paraná (BR)
  • Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (BR)
  • Universidade Estadual de Goiás (BR)
  • Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (BR)
  • Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (BR)
  • Universidade Federal de Viçosa (BR)
  • Instituto de Biociências, Letras e Ciências Exatas, câmpus de São José do Rio Preto (BR)
  • Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia (INPA) Manaus AM Brazil
  • Instituto de Biociências, Letras e Ciências Exatas Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) São José do Rio Preto SP Brazil
  • Laboratório de Organismos Aquáticos (LOA) Departamento de Ciências Biológicas Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz (UESC) Ilhéus BA Brazil
  • UniFG Centro Universitário (BR)
  • Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciencia e Tecnologia do Sul de Minas Gerais (IFSULDEMINAS) Poços de Caldas MG Brazil
  • Universidade Federal de Alfenas (BR)
  • Departamento de Biologia Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA) Lavras MG Brazil
  • Universidade Estadual de Maringá (BR)
  • Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz (BR)
  • Universidade Federal do Oeste do Pará (BR)
  • Museu de História Natural Capão da Imbuia (MHNCI) Curitiba PR Brazil
  • Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi (BR)
  • Laboratório de Ecologia Centro de Estudos em Recursos Naturais (CERNA) Universidade Estadual de Mato Grosso do Sul (UEMS) Dourados Brazil
  • Programa de Pós‐Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS) Campo Grande MS Brazil
Corresponding author
Dala‐Corte, Renato B.
Venue
Journal of Applied Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-05-29
Volume
57
Issue
7
Pages
1391-1402
ISSN
  • 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2664
OpenAlex
W3020838257
Cited by
239
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 54 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 9
FWCI
14.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (465610/2014‐5)
  • Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish biology, ecology, and behavior
Keywords
riparian vegetation loss, ecological thresholds, freshwater biodiversity, riparian buffers, riparian reserves, aquatic bioindicators, freshwater fish, aquatic invertebrates, small streams, Neotropical region, land use, early warning indicators, conservation policy

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