My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8045
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
8045
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:32 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 10:22:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
8045
Author
Pacey, C. A. and P. C. Marsh.
Title
Resource Use by Native and Non-Native Fishes of the Lower Colorado River
USFW Year
1998.
USFW - Doc Type
Literature Review, Summary, and Assessment of Relative Roles of Biotic and Abiotic Factors in Management of an Imperiled Indigenous Ichthyofauna-Final Report.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
73
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />7 <br />studies contained quantitative results specifically concerning fish interactions such as <br />piscivory, competition, predation, and aggression between and among fish species <br />represented in the lower Colorado River. We did not perform statistical analyses or <br />tabulate any statistical summaries. <br />In the future, meta-analysis may be a useful tool in summarizing the findings of this <br />literature review, minimizing funding needs for impending and possibly futile studies. <br />Meta-analysis is a quantitative method of comparing studies with similar hypotheses, <br />independent of outcomes and generating statistically meaningful results; it is the <br />"analysis of analyses" (Wachter 1988, Wolf 1986). As few as two studies may be used, <br />or as in the meta-analysis that led to conclusive evidence as to aspirin's benefits for <br />heart attack prevention, information from 22,000 U.S. doctors was collected (Mann <br />1990). Primarily used in social sciences, meta-analysis is beginning to enter into <br />biological sciences (Arngvist and Wooster 1995, Fernandez-Duque and Valeggia <br />1994). We performed an additional literature search (using the same three major <br />scientific data bases as cited above; approximate time-frame 1980 to present) to <br />generate studies, articles and books concerning the methodology of this analysis, <br />particularly its pros and cons relative to validity (APPENDIX V). <br />RESULTS <br />DATABASE SEARCH OUTCOMES -- There were 95,447 keyword "hits" among our <br />searches, and more than 8500 of these were selected for further examination <br />(APPENDIX II Tables 1, 2 and 3). Biological Abstracts yielded 26,682 hits from which <br />2514 were selected, Wildlife and Fisheries Review gave 42,485 hits (3151 selected), <br />and Zoological Records produced 26,161 matches (2723 selected). The US FWS web- <br />based site (US Fish and Wildlife Reference Service Database at www.fws.gov) <br />provided 59 hits on native and non-native species names (all selected, APPENDIX II <br />Table 2), and our search of academic works through Comprehensive Dissertation
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.