| Title |
Rodent herbivory differentially affects mortality rates of 14 native plant species with contrasting life history and growth form traits
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Oecologia, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00442-017-3944-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tiffanny R. Sharp Bowman, Brock R. McMillan, Samuel B. St. Clair |
| Abstract |
Ecosystems are transformed by changes in disturbance regimes including wildfire and herbivory. Rodent consumers can have strong top-down effects on plant community assembly through seed predation, but their impacts on post-germination seedling establishment via seedling herbivory need better characterization, particularly in deserts. To test the legacy effects of fire history, and native rodent consumers on seedling establishment, we evaluated factorial combinations of experimental exclusion of rodents and fire history (burned vs. unburned) on seedling survival of 14 native plant species that vary in their life history strategies and growth form in the Mojave Desert. Seedlings were placed into the experimental plots, and seedling survival was monitored daily for 8 days. The legacy effects of fire history had minimal effects on seedling survival, but rodent exclusion, year, and their interaction were strongly significant. Seedling survival rates were nearly sixfold greater in rodent exclusion plots compared to control plots in 2012 (53 vs. 9%) and 17-fold greater in 2013 (17 vs. 1%). The dramatic increase in seedling mortality from 2012 to 2013 was likely driven by an increase in rodent abundance and an outbreak of grasshoppers that appears to have intensified the rodent effect. There was strong variability in plant species survival in response to rodent herbivory with annual plants and forb species showing lower survival than perennial plants and shrub species. These results indicate that rodent consumers can strongly regulate seedling survival of native plant species with potentially strong regulatory effects on plant community development. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 16% |
| Researcher | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 5 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 11 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
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 27 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,480,316
of 23,003,906 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#3,273
of 4,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,341
of 316,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#52
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,003,906 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,236 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 316,062 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.