↓ Skip to main content

Difference in defense strategy in flower heads and leaves of Asteraceae: multiple-species approach

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, September 2013
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 (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Difference in defense strategy in flower heads and leaves of Asteraceae: multiple-species approach
Published in
Oecologia, September 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00442-013-2765-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michio Oguro, Satoki Sakai

Abstract

Although a vast number of studies have investigated defenses against herbivores in leaves, relatively little is known about defenses in flowers. Using wild individuals of 34 species of Asteraceae, we investigated differences in five traits that are thought to affect the intensity of herbivory (C, N, P, water, and total phenolic contents). Combinations of these traits between flower heads and leaves were studied as well. We also evaluated phylogenetic patterns of flower head and leaf traits. Flower heads had higher P and lower total phenolics than leaves. Water and C contents were negatively correlated both in the flower heads and leaves. N, P, and water contents were positively correlated in the flower heads, whereas this pattern was not found in the leaves. Thus, the traits we measured were more tightly inter-correlated in flower heads than in leaves. Because the flower heads had a lower total phenolic content, the relative allocation of defensive compounds could not be explained solely by fitness values of the organs. Perhaps plants employ an escape strategy rather than a defense strategy to cope with floral herbivores and higher allocation in P may enhance their escape from herbivores by improving the growth rate of flower heads, though our result might be affected in part by the plasticity of plants growing at different sites. Moreover, we found weak phylogenetic signals in the defensive traits. Because we found significant differences in the flower head traits, these weak signals may imply that the traits we measured evolved frequently.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 47 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 12%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 5 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 63%
Environmental Science 5 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Unspecified 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 6 12%
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 12 September 2014.
All research outputs
#14,177,097
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#3,060
of 4,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,131
of 197,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#20
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,205 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 197,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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 53% of its contemporaries.