Cited by 107Fish Ecology and Management StudiesFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyFish biology, ecology, and behavior

Fish species‐environment and abundance relationships in a Great Plains river system

Abstract

Fish assemblages in the upper Red River system of southwestern Oklahoma (USA) were predictable along measured environmental gradients Conductivity was the most important variable predicting structure of fish assemblages followed by stream size, alkalinity woody debris and water clarity Classification of abundance data identified four groups each of species and sites Species groups were separated on a habitat template indicating similar environmental responses within groups However, site groups showed considerable overlap on the template Correlations among species environmental preferences were significantly associated with correlations of species abundances Likewise, site correlations on the basis of measured environmental variables and on the basis of species abundances were significantly similar We tested abundance and distribution data for agreement with the hierarchical model of Kolasa Several testable predictions of the model described our data well specialist species outnumbered generalist species and were less abundant on average, than generalist species Average abundance of species was highly correlated with their ecological ranges and species were clumped along both ecological range and abundance axes

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-0587.1993.tb00054.x

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Current velocity, water depth and substratum type have been related to stream fish community patterns in many studies.

    “These parameters have been related to stream fish community patterns in many studies (Pusey, Arthington & Read, 1993;Taylor, Winston & Matthews, 1993;Kamdem Toham & Teugels, 1998)”

    From Effects of deforestation on fish community structure in Ecuadorian Amazon streams (2002) · cites this paper as Taylor, Winston & Matthews, 1993

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Taylor, C. M., Winston, M. R., & Matthews, W. J.
Affiliations
University of Oklahoma (US)
Venue
Ecography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1993-01
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
16-23
ISSN
  • 0906-7590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0587
OpenAlex
W1965437242
Cited by
107
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Ecography (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish biology, ecology, and behavior
Keywords
fish assemblages, species-environment relationships, species abundance, conductivity, stream size, alkalinity, woody debris, water transparency, habitat template, generalist and specialist species, ecological range, species distribution

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