Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Figure 1.

Averages of invertebrate community variables across the experimental treatments sampled on days 18 and 30 combined.

Error bars (SEs) show the within-channel variation (n = 3) that is represented by the factor ‘sample’ in the statistical analysis (see text). Text in rectangles indicates significant single-factor effects (nutrients: N, sediment: S and temperature: T) or interactions.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Table 1.

Invertebrate responses to the experimental treatments.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Figure 2.

Abundance patterns (averages +SEs) for common invertebrate taxa (days 18 and 30 combined) that showed significant interactions between paired manipulated factors.

For more details see Fig. 1.

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Figure 3.

Averages of leaf decay variables (sampled on day 18) and algal community/biomass variables (sampled on day 29) across the experimental treatments.

For more details see Fig. 1.

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Table 2.

Leaf decomposition and algal responses to the experimental treatments.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Figure 4.

Density patterns (averages +SEs) for the common benthic algal taxa sampled on day 29 that showed significant interactions between paired manipulated factors.

For more details see Fig. 1.

More »

Figure 4 Expand

Figure 5.

Relative abundance patterns (averages +SEs) for the benthic algal growth form classifications sampled on day 29.

For more details see Fig. 1.

More »

Figure 5 Expand

Table 3.

Overview of results for biological response variables.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Figure 6.

Diagram of the experimental design, showing the 6 inflow pipes (above) and the combinations of ambient and augmented stressors applied to each of the 18 channels.

More »

Figure 6 Expand

Table 4.

Algal growth form classification.

More »

Table 4 Expand