↓ Skip to main content

Differing nutritional constraints of consumers across ecosystems

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
Title
Differing nutritional constraints of consumers across ecosystems
Published in
Oecologia, January 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00442-013-2860-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nathan P. Lemoine, Sean T. Giery, Deron E. Burkepile

Abstract

Stoichiometric mismatches between resources and consumers may drive a number of important ecological interactions, such as predation and herbivory. Such mismatches in nitrogen (N) or phosphorus (P) content between resources and consumers have furthered our understanding of consumer behavior and growth patterns in aquatic systems. However, stoichiometric data for multiple consumers from the same community are lacking in terrestrial systems. Here, we present the results of a study designed to characterize nutritional constraints within a terrestrial arthropod community. In order to place our results in a broader context, we compared our data on resource-consumer stoichiometry to those of stream and lake ecosystems. We found that N and P varied among trophic levels, and that high N:P content of herbivores suggests that herbivores might experience strong N-limitation. However, incredibly low P-content of plant foliage leads to potential P-limitation in herbivores that is nearly as strong as potential N-limitation. Moreover, arthropod predators may also be strongly P-limited. In fact, potential nutrient limitation of terrestrial herbivores in our study is similar to nutrient limitation from streams and lakes, suggesting that similar nutritional constraints may be operating across all three study systems. Importantly, our data suggest that consumers in lakes experience a trade-off between N- and P-limitation, while terrestrial consumers experience simultaneous strengthening or weakening of N- and P-limitation. We suggest that P may be overlooked as an important limiting nutrient in terrestrial ecosystems.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 3 4%
Canada 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Argentina 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Unknown 78 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 24%
Researcher 19 22%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 14 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 49%
Environmental Science 19 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Philosophy 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 17 20%
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 01 March 2018.
All research outputs
#4,684,911
of 22,738,543 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#965
of 4,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,887
of 305,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#9
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,738,543 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,207 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 74% 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 305,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.