↓ Skip to main content

Scaling metabolism from individuals to reef‐fish communities at broad spatial scales

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology Letters, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
17 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
75 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
219 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
Scaling metabolism from individuals to reef‐fish communities at broad spatial scales
Published in
Ecology Letters, June 2014
DOI 10.1111/ele.12309
Pubmed ID
Authors

D. R. Barneche, M. Kulbicki, S. R. Floeter, A. M. Friedlander, J. Maina, A. P. Allen

Abstract

Fishes contribute substantially to energy and nutrient fluxes in reef ecosystems, but quantifying these roles is challenging. Here, we do so by synthesising a large compilation of fish metabolic-rate data with a comprehensive database on reef-fish community abundance and biomass. Individual-level analyses support predictions of Metabolic Theory after accounting for significant family-level variation, and indicate that some tropical reef fishes may already be experiencing thermal regimes at or near their temperature optima. Community-level analyses indicate that total estimated respiratory fluxes of reef-fish communities increase on average ~2-fold from 22 to 28 °C. Comparisons of estimated fluxes among trophic groups highlight striking differences in resource use by communities in different regions, perhaps partly reflecting distinct evolutionary histories, and support the hypothesis that piscivores receive substantial energy subsidies from outside reefs. Our study demonstrates one approach to synthesising individual- and community-level data to establish broad-scale trends in contributions of biota to ecosystem dynamics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 5 2%
United States 3 1%
France 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 204 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 60 27%
Researcher 42 19%
Student > Master 38 17%
Student > Bachelor 16 7%
Student > Postgraduate 8 4%
Other 27 12%
Unknown 28 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 100 46%
Environmental Science 64 29%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 11 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 <1%
Engineering 2 <1%
Other 5 2%
Unknown 35 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 29 October 2015.
All research outputs
#1,856,451
of 24,558,777 outputs
Outputs from Ecology Letters
#1,082
of 3,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,443
of 233,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology Letters
#15
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,558,777 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,028 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 233,139 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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.