1995
DOI: 10.1016/0304-3770(95)00457-b
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Aquatic vegetation of Nova Scotian lakes differing in acidity and trophic status

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
17
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The inclusion of area in the linear model that defines the relationship between SD and Zc improved its prediction accuracy (from R 2 =0.75 to R 2 =0.83). This is not a surprising finding but confirms the significant influence of lake morphometry (Kolada, 2014) in agreement with Duarte and Kalff (1990) and Srivastava et al (1995).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…The inclusion of area in the linear model that defines the relationship between SD and Zc improved its prediction accuracy (from R 2 =0.75 to R 2 =0.83). This is not a surprising finding but confirms the significant influence of lake morphometry (Kolada, 2014) in agreement with Duarte and Kalff (1990) and Srivastava et al (1995).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…The importance of each environmental variable can be inferred from correlations between environmental variables and the species axes. To avoid the destabilization that can occur as a result of strong correlations among environmental variables when using canonical coefficients, inter-set correlations are reported here (Srivastava 1995). To test whether trophic levels were affected by similar abiotic factors, we tested for correlations between the loadings of each environmental variable on the species data across groups.…”
Section: Richness and Diversity Metricsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have demonstrated the influence of hydrology and geomorphology on the distribution and abundance of aquatic plants in lotic and lentic systems (Lacoul and Freedman, 2006 and extensive literature cited therein). Many authors have emphasised the key importance of environmental factors, such as light availability, turbidity, humic substances or trophic status (Srivastava et al, 1995;Toivonen and Huttunen, 1995;Middelboe and Markager, 1997;Vestergaard and Sand-Jensen, 2000;Squires, 2002;Jeppesen et al, 2000), sediment characteristics (Barko and Smart, 1986) or physical factors, such as slope, wind or wave action (Duarte and Kalff, 1986) in determining aquatic vegetation patterns. The manifold of determinants influencing macrophyte communities in rivers and lakes raises the question of the diagnostic potential and applicability of macrophyte indices for ecological status assessment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%