↓ Skip to main content

Major consequences of minor damage: impacts of small grazers on fast-growing kelps

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
Title
Major consequences of minor damage: impacts of small grazers on fast-growing kelps
Published in
Oecologia, October 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00442-013-2795-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alistair G. B. Poore, Lars Gutow, José F. Pantoja, Fadia Tala, David Jofré Madariaga, Martin Thiel

Abstract

Damage by small herbivores can have disproportionately large effects on the fitness of individual plants if damage is concentrated on valuable tissues or on select individuals within a population. In marine systems, the impact of tissue loss on the growth rates of habitat-forming algae is poorly understood. We quantified the grazing damage by an isopod Amphoroidea typa on two species of large kelps, Lessonia spicata and Macrocystis pyrifera, in temperate Chile to test whether non-lethal grazing damage could reduce kelp growth rates and photosynthetic efficiency. For L. spicata, grazing damage was widespread in the field, unevenly distributed on several spatial scales (among individuals and among tissue types) and negatively correlated with blade growth rates. In field experiments, feeding by A. typa reduced the concentration of photosynthetic pigments and led to large reductions (~80%) in blade growth rates despite limited loss of kelp biomass (0.5% per day). For M. pyrifera, rates of damage in the field were lower and high densities of grazers were unable to reduce growth rates in field experiments. These results demonstrate that even low per capita grazing rates can result in large reductions in the growth of a kelp, due the spatial clustering of herbivores in the field and the selective removal of photosynthetically active tissues. The impacts of small herbivores on plant performance are thus not easily predicted from consumption rates or abundance in the field, and vary with plant species due to variation in their ability to compensate for damage.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 3%
Mexico 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Unknown 73 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 19%
Researcher 15 19%
Student > Bachelor 11 14%
Student > Master 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 14 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 49%
Environmental Science 10 13%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 20 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 08 October 2013.
All research outputs
#5,850,959
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#1,220
of 4,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,003
of 209,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#5
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,206 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 209,506 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.