↓ Skip to main content

Plants do not count… or do they? New perspectives on the universality of senescence

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ecology, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% 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 (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 Mendeley
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
Plants do not count… or do they? New perspectives on the universality of senescence
Published in
Journal of Ecology, April 2013
DOI 10.1111/1365-2745.12089
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roberto Salguero-Gómez, Richard P Shefferson, Michael J Hutchings

Abstract

1. Senescence, the physiological decline that results in decreasing survival and/or reproduction with age, remains one of the most perplexing topics in biology. Most theories explaining the evolution of senescence (i.e. antagonistic pleiotropy, accumulation of mutations, disposable soma) were developed decades ago. Even though these theories have implicitly focused on unitary animals, they have also been used as the foundation from which the universality of senescence across the tree of life is assumed. 2. Surprisingly, little is known about the general patterns, causes and consequences of whole-individual senescence in the plant kingdom. There are important differences between plants and most animals, including modular architecture, the absence of early determination of cell lines between the soma and gametes, and cellular division that does not always shorten telomere length. These characteristics violate the basic assumptions of the classical theories of senescence and therefore call the generality of senescence theories into question. 3. This Special Feature contributes to the field of whole-individual plant senescence with five research articles addressing topics ranging from physiology to demographic modelling and comparative analyses. These articles critically examine the basic assumptions of senescence theories such as age-specific gene action, the evolution of senescence regardless of the organism's architecture and environmental filtering, and the role of abiotic agents on mortality trajectories. 4. Synthesis. Understanding the conditions under which senescence has evolved is of general importance across biology, ecology, evolution, conservation biology, medicine, gerontology, law and social sciences. The question 'why is senescence universal or why is it not?' naturally calls for an evolutionary perspective. Senescence is a puzzling phenomenon, and new insights will be gained by uniting methods, theories and observations from formal demography, animal demography and plant population ecology. Plants are more amenable than animals to experiments investigating senescence, and there is a wealth of published plant demographic data that enable interpretation of experimental results in the context of their full life cycles. It is time to make plants count in the field of senescence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 3 2%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Brazil 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 129 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 23%
Researcher 33 23%
Student > Master 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Professor 12 8%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 13 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 78 54%
Environmental Science 23 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 3%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 16 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 05 September 2022.
All research outputs
#1,002,456
of 23,269,984 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ecology
#184
of 3,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,959
of 195,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ecology
#2
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,269,984 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,227 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 195,393 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 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.