| Title |
The size distribution of organic carbon in headwater streams in the Amazon basin
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-016-6041-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joana D’Arc de Paula, Flávio Jesus Luizão, Maria Teresa Fernandez Piedade |
| Abstract |
Despite the strong representativeness of streams in the Amazon basin, their role in the accumulation of coarse particulate organic carbon (CPOC), fine particulate organic carbon (FPOC), and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in transport, an important energy source in these environments, is poorly known. It is known that the arboreal vegetation in the Amazon basin is influenced by soil fertility and rainfall gradients, but would these gradients promote local differences in organic matter in headwater streams? To answer this question, 14 low-order streams were selected within these gradients along the Amazon basin, with extensions that varied between 4 and 8 km. The efficiency of the transformation of particulate into dissolved carbon fractions was assessed for each stream. The mean monthly benthic organic matter storage ranged between 1.58 and 9.40 t ha(-1) month(-1). In all locations, CPOC was the most abundant fraction in biomass, followed by FPOC and DOC. Rainfall and soil fertility influenced the distribution of the C fraction (p = 0.01), showing differentiated particulate organic carbon (POC) storage and DOC transportation along the basin. Furthermore, the results revealed that carbon quantification at the basin level could be underestimated, ultimately influencing the global carbon calculations for the region. This is especially due to the fact that the majority of studies consider only fine particulate organic matter and dissolved organic matter, which represent less than 50 % of the stored and transported carbon in streambeds. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 7 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 29% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 June 2016.
All research outputs
#21,420,714
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#7,000
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#342,298
of 402,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#101
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 402,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.