↓ Skip to main content

Effects of subsidy quality on reciprocal subsidies: how leaf litter species changes frog biomass export

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
Title
Effects of subsidy quality on reciprocal subsidies: how leaf litter species changes frog biomass export
Published in
Oecologia, January 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00442-013-2870-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia E. Earl, Paula O. Castello, Kara E. Cohagen, Raymond D. Semlitsch

Abstract

Spatial subsidies are resources transferred from one ecosystem to another and which can greatly affect recipient systems. Increased subsidy quantity is known to increase these effects, but subsidy quality is likely also important. We examined the effects of leaf litter quality (varying in nutrient and tannin content) in pond mesocosms on gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor) biomass export, as well as water quality and ecosystem processes. We used litter from three different tree species native to Missouri [white oak (Quercus alba), northern red oak (Quercus rubra), and sugar maple (Acer saccharum)], one non-native tree [white pine (Pinus strobus)], and a common aquatic grass [prairie cordgrass (Spartina pectinata)]. We found that leaf litter species affected almost every variable we measured. Gray treefrog biomass export was greatest in mesocosms with grass litter and lowest with white oak litter. Differences in biomass export were affected by high tannin concentrations (or possibly the correlated variable, dissolved oxygen) via their effects on survival, and by primary production, which altered mean body mass. Effects of litter species could often be traced back to the characteristics of the litter itself: leaf nitrogen, phosphorus, and tannin content, which highlights the importance of plant functional traits in affecting aquatic ecosystems. This work and others stress that changes in forest species composition could greatly influence aquatic systems and aquatic-terrestrial linkages.

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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 74 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 20%
Researcher 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 14 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 41%
Environmental Science 19 25%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 16 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 January 2014.
All research outputs
#22,012,573
of 24,558,777 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#4,157
of 4,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#277,516
of 315,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#46
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,558,777 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,405 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 315,838 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.