Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 389

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 98 of the 98 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Beyond the natural flow regime? Broadening the hydro‐ecological foundation to meet environmental flows challenges in a non‐stationary world

Poff, N. LeRoy·2018·Freshwater Biology

Abstract

The natural flow regime concept has contributed significantly to environmental flows (e‐flows) science and applications over the last 20 years. Natural flow regimes reflect long‐term, historical patterns of flow variability that have shaped riverine species’ adaptations and continue to shape community and ecosystem structure and function. This scientific perspective, however, carries with it important assumptions about climatic and ecological stationarity in terms of “reference” conditions that provide a basis for comparing success or outcomes of e‐flow interventions. Non‐stationarity in climate and other environmental conditions (temperature, sediment, nutrients) and in ecological features (non‐native species spread) presents important challenges for environmental flows science. Reliance on the assumption of restoration to reference conditions for either hydrologic or ecological conditions is no longer tenable, and an expanded e‐flows science foundation is needed to meet several challenges facing future e‐flows implementations. Currently recognised limitations of e‐flows science contribute to the emergence of research frontiers that need further development. These are (1) shifting from static, regime‐based flow metrics to dynamic, time‐varying flow characterisations; (2) expanding the ecological metrics (and space–time scales) used in e‐flows from primary reliance on ecosystem states to include process (population) rates and species traits; (3) incorporating other “non‐flow” environmental features (e.g. temperature, sediment) to guide prioritisation of e‐flows applications with a likelihood of success; and (4) broadening the ecological foundation of e‐flows to incorporate more ecological theory that will contribute to a more predictive science. The natural flow regime perspective of managing for historical variability will remain important to understand ecological response to hydrologic alterations and to inform e‐flows management. However, under shifting hydro‐climatic and ecological conditions, a new imperative of managing for resilience is emerging, that is, identifying and prescribing e‐flows to sustain robust, persistent and socially valued ecological characteristics in a flexible and adaptive management framework.

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 · 10.1111/fwb.13038

Cites

98 of 98 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 98 references

Cited by

See all 389

Metadata

Authors
Poff, N. L.
Venue
Freshwater Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-10-26
Volume
63
Issue
8
Pages
1011-1021
ISSN
  • 0046-5070 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2427
OpenAlex
W2766361688
Cited by
389
References
98
FWCI
23.89
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: Beyond the natural flow regime? Broadening the hydro‐ecological foundation to meet environmental flows challenges in a non‐stationary world. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/fwb.13038
The paper
Poff, N. L. (2018). Beyond the natural flow regime? Broadening the hydro‐ecological foundation to meet environmental flows challenges in a non‐stationary world. Freshwater Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.13038

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.