Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 687

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Grazing Minnows, Piscivorous Bass, and Stream Algae: Dynamics of a Strong Interaction

Power, Mary E., Matthews, William J., Stewart, Arthur J.·1985·Ecology

Abstract

Striking differences in pool—to—pool distributions of an algae—grazing minnow (Campostoma anomalum), attached algae (predominantly Spirogyra sp. and Rhizoclonium sp.), and bass (Micropterus salmoides and M. punctulatus) are known to occur in some small Oklahoma streams. This study evaluates the complementarity of bass, Campostoma, and algae at different seasons, and uses in—stream experimental manipulations of bass and Campostoma to determine if the patterns resulted from strong interactions between predators, herbivores, and algae. In a 1—km reach of Brier Creek (south—central Oklahoma), bass and Campostoma distributions in 14 consecutive pools were inversely related in six of seven censuses conducted from 8 November 1982 to 5 September 1983. Bass and Campostoma co—ocurred in more than two pools only on two occasions, following the largest floods of the year. Campostoma and algal abundances were inversely related during late summer and in both autumns of this study. This relationship did not hold during the spring, when floods strongly affected algal distributions. During autumn of 1983, we removed bass from a pool, fenced it longtidinally, and added Campostomata to one side (1.4 individuals/m 2). Over the next 5 wk, standing crop of algae decreased significantly on the Campostoma side but increased on the control side. In a nearby unmanipulated Campostoma pool, standing crop of algae was consistently low. We added three free—swimming bass to a Compostoma pool to evaluate presumptive predator—prey interactions. Within 3 h, the Campostoma moved from the deepest part of the pool to shallow areas. Over the next 5 wk, numbers of grazing Campostoma declined due to behavioral changes, emigration, and (presumably) predation. The standing crop of algae increased significantly 10—13 d after bass addition. In a second bass—addition experiment in June 1984, Campostoma responses were almost identical, and algal standing crop in deeper areas increased significantly after 1 wk. Collectively, our censuses and the experiments indicate that in Brier Creek, biotic interactions strongly influence the pool—to—pool distributions of Campostoma and algae, particularly during long periods of constant low discharge.

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 · 10.2307/1938007

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 687

Metadata

Authors
Power, M. E., Matthews, W. J., & Stewart, A. J.
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1985-10
Volume
66
Issue
5
Pages
1448-1456
ISSN
  • 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-9170
OpenAlex
W1983316406
Cited by
687
References
2
FWCI
28.98
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: Grazing Minnows, Piscivorous Bass, and Stream Algae: Dynamics of a Strong Interaction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1938007
The paper
Power, M. E., Matthews, W. J., & Stewart, A. J. (1985). Grazing Minnows, Piscivorous Bass, and Stream Algae: Dynamics of a Strong Interaction. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1938007

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.