↓ Skip to main content

Relative predation risk and risk of desiccation co-determine oviposition preferences in Cope’s gray treefrog, Hyla chrysoscelis

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Relative predation risk and risk of desiccation co-determine oviposition preferences in Cope’s gray treefrog, Hyla chrysoscelis
Published in
Oecologia, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00442-017-3875-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew R. Pintar, William J. Resetarits

Abstract

Habitat permanence and threat of predation are primary drivers of community assembly and composition in lentic freshwater systems. Pond-breeding amphibians select oviposition sites to maximize fitness and minimize risks of predation and desiccation of their offspring, typically facing a trade-off between the two as predation risk often increases as desiccation risk decreases. To experimentally determine if Hyla chrysoscelis partition oviposition along gradients of relative desiccation risk and predation risk, we tested oviposition site preference in a natural population of treefrogs colonizing experimental ponds that varied in water depth and contained predatory larvae of two Ambystoma salamander species. Hyla chrysoscelis selected habitats with both lower predation risk, avoiding A. talpoideum over A. maculatum, and lower desiccation risk, selecting ponds with three times greater depth. We demonstrate that adult oviposition site choices simultaneously minimize relative predation risk and desiccation risk and that closely related salamander species produce functionally different responses among colonizing animals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 25%
Student > Master 6 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Researcher 3 8%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 44%
Environmental Science 7 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 September 2017.
All research outputs
#7,016,483
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#1,527
of 4,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,816
of 310,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#13
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,231 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 310,917 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 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 65% of its contemporaries.