↓ Skip to main content

Nutrient Enrichment Increases Mortality of Mangroves

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
165 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
423 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Nutrient Enrichment Increases Mortality of Mangroves
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2009
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0005600
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine E. Lovelock, Marilyn C. Ball, Katherine C. Martin, Ilka C. Feller

Abstract

Nutrient enrichment of the coastal zone places intense pressure on marine communities. Previous studies have shown that growth of intertidal mangrove forests is accelerated with enhanced nutrient availability. However, nutrient enrichment favours growth of shoots relative to roots, thus enhancing growth rates but increasing vulnerability to environmental stresses that adversely affect plant water relations. Two such stresses are high salinity and low humidity, both of which require greater investment in roots to meet the demands for water by the shoots. Here we present data from a global network of sites that documents enhanced mortality of mangroves with experimental nutrient enrichment at sites where high sediment salinity was coincident with low rainfall and low humidity. Thus the benefits of increased mangrove growth in response to coastal eutrophication is offset by the costs of decreased resilience due to mortality during drought, with mortality increasing with soil water salinity along climatic gradients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 423 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 5 1%
India 3 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Other 5 1%
Unknown 402 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 75 18%
Student > Master 74 17%
Researcher 69 16%
Student > Bachelor 48 11%
Other 19 4%
Other 66 16%
Unknown 72 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 149 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 127 30%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 31 7%
Engineering 6 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 1%
Other 21 5%
Unknown 84 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 18 June 2022.
All research outputs
#1,457,214
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#19,043
of 193,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,339
of 96,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#61
of 505 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,796 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
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 96,973 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 505 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.