{"title":"样本选择差异:仅对卵石取样会高估溪流底栖藻类的生物量","authors":"Mitsuya Inoue, Kentaro Nozaki, Motomi Genkai‐Kato","doi":"10.1111/1440-1703.12523","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite the fact that scientists are aware that the streambed consists of various substrata in size, the estimation of benthic algal biomass has been conducted based almost exclusively on cobble sampling. This disparity in samples selected for the biomass estimation occurs because frame sampling collects all substrata, encompassed by the frame, including sand and stones, and is a time‐consuming method compared to single‐stone sampling. We conducted frame versus cobble sampling to test for sample selection disparity (SSD) in the estimation of benthic algal biomass. Estimates of algal biomass based on the frame sampling (area: 0.25 m<jats:sup>2</jats:sup>) were compared with those based on the cobble sampling taken at the same sampling points in a diatom‐dominated stream. Benthic algal biomass estimated based on cobble sampling was larger than the biomass estimated with frame sampling. The contribution of cobbles to the algal biomass encompassed by the frame was considerably higher than smaller substrata. These results suggest that cobble sampling tends to result in an overestimate of the benthic algal biomass in natural streams. Because the frame sampling requires intensive labor and time, we here proposed a general model based on quick visual assessments for percentage cover of cobbles on the streambed to calibrate estimates obtained by cobble sampling.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sample selection disparity: Sampling only cobble overestimates the biomass of stream benthic algae\",\"authors\":\"Mitsuya Inoue, Kentaro Nozaki, Motomi Genkai‐Kato\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1440-1703.12523\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite the fact that scientists are aware that the streambed consists of various substrata in size, the estimation of benthic algal biomass has been conducted based almost exclusively on cobble sampling. This disparity in samples selected for the biomass estimation occurs because frame sampling collects all substrata, encompassed by the frame, including sand and stones, and is a time‐consuming method compared to single‐stone sampling. We conducted frame versus cobble sampling to test for sample selection disparity (SSD) in the estimation of benthic algal biomass. Estimates of algal biomass based on the frame sampling (area: 0.25 m<jats:sup>2</jats:sup>) were compared with those based on the cobble sampling taken at the same sampling points in a diatom‐dominated stream. Benthic algal biomass estimated based on cobble sampling was larger than the biomass estimated with frame sampling. The contribution of cobbles to the algal biomass encompassed by the frame was considerably higher than smaller substrata. These results suggest that cobble sampling tends to result in an overestimate of the benthic algal biomass in natural streams. Because the frame sampling requires intensive labor and time, we here proposed a general model based on quick visual assessments for percentage cover of cobbles on the streambed to calibrate estimates obtained by cobble sampling.\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1703.12523\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1703.12523","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Sample selection disparity: Sampling only cobble overestimates the biomass of stream benthic algae
Despite the fact that scientists are aware that the streambed consists of various substrata in size, the estimation of benthic algal biomass has been conducted based almost exclusively on cobble sampling. This disparity in samples selected for the biomass estimation occurs because frame sampling collects all substrata, encompassed by the frame, including sand and stones, and is a time‐consuming method compared to single‐stone sampling. We conducted frame versus cobble sampling to test for sample selection disparity (SSD) in the estimation of benthic algal biomass. Estimates of algal biomass based on the frame sampling (area: 0.25 m2) were compared with those based on the cobble sampling taken at the same sampling points in a diatom‐dominated stream. Benthic algal biomass estimated based on cobble sampling was larger than the biomass estimated with frame sampling. The contribution of cobbles to the algal biomass encompassed by the frame was considerably higher than smaller substrata. These results suggest that cobble sampling tends to result in an overestimate of the benthic algal biomass in natural streams. Because the frame sampling requires intensive labor and time, we here proposed a general model based on quick visual assessments for percentage cover of cobbles on the streambed to calibrate estimates obtained by cobble sampling.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.