The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 9:30 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 1 hour.
2007
DOI: 10.1002/ieam.5630030216
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learned discourses

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 1 publication
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Time to recovery could not be estimated from many otherwise relevant case reports. Examples included reports from which (1) biological conditions appeared to be substantially constrained by ongoing pollution and thus no judgement of recovery times could be made (Arnekleiv & Størset, 1995; Chadwick et al, 1986; Hoiland et al, 1994; Kowalik et al, 2007; Lefcort et al, 2010; Smith, 2003); (2) data were not presented as a time series (Rabeni et al, 1985); (3) reference and assessment sites were too dissimilar to assess effects or recovery (Buys et al, 2015); or (4) recovery only addressed chemical endpoints (Finley & Garrett, 2007; Hornberger, et al 2009; Lemly, 1997).…”
Section: Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Time to recovery could not be estimated from many otherwise relevant case reports. Examples included reports from which (1) biological conditions appeared to be substantially constrained by ongoing pollution and thus no judgement of recovery times could be made (Arnekleiv & Størset, 1995; Chadwick et al, 1986; Hoiland et al, 1994; Kowalik et al, 2007; Lefcort et al, 2010; Smith, 2003); (2) data were not presented as a time series (Rabeni et al, 1985); (3) reference and assessment sites were too dissimilar to assess effects or recovery (Buys et al, 2015); or (4) recovery only addressed chemical endpoints (Finley & Garrett, 2007; Hornberger, et al 2009; Lemly, 1997).…”
Section: Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%