1996
DOI: 10.2307/1467432
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inter-Habitat Variation in Benthic Community Structure, Function, and Organic Matter Storage in 3 Appalachian Headwater Streams

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
46
2
1

Year Published

2000
2000
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 74 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
3
46
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Within a stream reach there are a range of abiotic and biotic processes which directly and indirectly shape invertebrates assemblage, resulting in high within-reach variability that can be greater than among-stream variation (Angradi 1996;Halwas et al 2005). In general, different habitats within a reach support different kinds of taxa and functional processes (Hawkins et al 1982;Logan and Brooker 1983;Huryn and Wallace 1987;Angradi 1996;Scullion et al 1982;Halwas et al 2005).…”
Section: Reach Levelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Within a stream reach there are a range of abiotic and biotic processes which directly and indirectly shape invertebrates assemblage, resulting in high within-reach variability that can be greater than among-stream variation (Angradi 1996;Halwas et al 2005). In general, different habitats within a reach support different kinds of taxa and functional processes (Hawkins et al 1982;Logan and Brooker 1983;Huryn and Wallace 1987;Angradi 1996;Scullion et al 1982;Halwas et al 2005).…”
Section: Reach Levelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, different habitats within a reach support different kinds of taxa and functional processes (Hawkins et al 1982;Logan and Brooker 1983;Huryn and Wallace 1987;Angradi 1996;Scullion et al 1982;Halwas et al 2005). However, invertebrates assemblage, abundance and production are highly variable and strongly related to localized habitat features such as channel form, riparian land cover, disturbance and recovery.…”
Section: Reach Levelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…At this site we observed the highest proportion of shredders, which prefer forested to open floodplain due to higher detrital food resources (Arscott et al 2003), but the difference was insignificant low in comparison with the disturbed sites. We suppose that accumulation of LWD at impacted sites could represent a source of BOM, which shredders feed on (Huryn & Wallace 1987;Boulton & Lake 1992;Minshall et al 1992;Angradi 1996;Voelz & Ward 1996;Wallace et al 1999). …”
Section: Metricsmentioning
confidence: 99%