↓ Skip to main content

Enchytraeus crypticus fitness: effect of density on a two-generation study

Overview of attention for article published in Ecotoxicology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Enchytraeus crypticus fitness: effect of density on a two-generation study
Published in
Ecotoxicology, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10646-017-1785-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Micael F. M. Gonçalves, Susana I. L. Gomes, Amadeu M. V. M Soares, Janeck J. Scott-Fordsmand, Mónica J. B. Amorim

Abstract

Organisms' density can influence physiological processes related with fitness. In the present study we assessed the influence of organisms' density on the life-history parameters in two consecutive generations in Enchytraeus crypticus (Oligochaeta), a standard model in soil ecotoxicology. The densities tested were 1 (N1) and 20 (N20) organisms per replicate and 10 vs. 20 g of soil (for the 2nd generation test only). Results showed that reproductive output was affected by density, with organisms in N1 producing three times more juveniles per adult than when at N20. Organisms' length was affected by both density and space, i.e., organisms were smaller when less space available. Further, the density of parental generation (F0) had no influence on the endpoints reproduction and length assessed in F1, hence there was no transference of effects. These findings have potential implications in the standard Enchytraeid Reproduction Test, i.e. early mortality of the adults during toxicant exposure can affect the number and size of the offspring and the final results will also reflect the density related changes in reproduction.

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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 30%
Researcher 5 22%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Master 1 4%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 6 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Engineering 1 4%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,924,102
of 22,955,959 outputs
Outputs from Ecotoxicology
#574
of 1,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,266
of 311,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecotoxicology
#13
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,955,959 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,478 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 311,210 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.