↓ Skip to main content

Carrying capacity in a heterogeneous environment with habitat connectivity

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology Letters, July 2017
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 (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Carrying capacity in a heterogeneous environment with habitat connectivity
Published in
Ecology Letters, July 2017
DOI 10.1111/ele.12807
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bo Zhang, Alex Kula, Keenan M. L. Mack, Lu Zhai, Arrix L. Ryce, Wei‐Ming Ni, Donald L. DeAngelis, J. David Van Dyken

Abstract

A large body of theory predicts that populations diffusing in heterogeneous environments reach higher total size than if non-diffusing, and, paradoxically, higher size than in a corresponding homogeneous environment. However, this theory and its assumptions have not been rigorously tested. Here, we extended previous theory to include exploitable resources, proving qualitatively novel results, which we tested experimentally using spatially diffusing laboratory populations of yeast. Consistent with previous theory, we predicted and experimentally observed that spatial diffusion increased total equilibrium population abundance in heterogeneous environments, with the effect size depending on the relationship between r and K. Refuting previous theory, however, we discovered that homogeneously distributed resources support higher total carrying capacity than heterogeneously distributed resources, even with species diffusion. Our results provide rigorous experimental tests of new and old theory, demonstrating how the traditional notion of carrying capacity is ambiguous for populations diffusing in spatially heterogeneous environments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 97 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 18%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 14 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 41%
Environmental Science 26 27%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Mathematics 1 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 22 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 21 February 2022.
All research outputs
#5,134,660
of 25,378,162 outputs
Outputs from Ecology Letters
#1,983
of 3,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,803
of 327,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology Letters
#32
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,378,162 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,111 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.3. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 327,078 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 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.