↓ Skip to main content

Plant–animal interactions in suburban environments: implications for floral evolution

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
Title
Plant–animal interactions in suburban environments: implications for floral evolution
Published in
Oecologia, November 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00442-013-2797-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca E. Irwin, Paige S. Warren, Adrian L. Carper, Lynn S. Adler

Abstract

Plant interactions with mutualists and antagonists vary remarkably across space, and have played key roles in the ecology and evolution of flowering plants. One dominant form of spatial variation is human modification of the landscape, including urbanization and suburbanization. Our goal was to assess how suburbanization affected plant-animal interactions in Gelsemium sempervirens in the southeastern United States, including interactions with mutualists (pollination) and antagonists (nectar robbing and florivory). Based on differences in plant-animal interactions measured in multiple replicate sites, we then developed predictions for how these differences would affect patterns of natural selection, and we explored the patterns using measurements of floral and defensive traits in the field and in a common garden. We found that Gelsemium growing in suburban sites experienced more robbing and florivory as well as more heterospecific but not conspecific pollen transfer. Floral traits, particularly corolla length and width, influenced the susceptibility of plants to particular interactors. Observational data of floral traits measured in the field and in a common garden provided some supporting but also some conflicting evidence for the hypothesis that floral traits evolved in response to differences in species interactions in suburban vs. wild sites. However, the degree to which plants can respond to any one interactor may be constrained by correlations among floral morphological traits. Taken together, consideration of the broader geographic context in which organisms interact, in both suburban and wild areas, is fundamental to our understanding of the forces that shape contemporary plant-animal interactions and selection pressures in native species.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
France 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Serbia 1 <1%
Unknown 118 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 26%
Researcher 29 23%
Student > Bachelor 16 13%
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 15 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 70 56%
Environmental Science 21 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 3%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 20 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 April 2014.
All research outputs
#14,457,164
of 25,149,126 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#2,994
of 4,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,468
of 223,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#16
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,149,126 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,446 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 223,231 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 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 70% of its contemporaries.