↓ Skip to main content

Size change, shape change, and the growth space of a community

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Theoretical Biology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Size change, shape change, and the growth space of a community
Published in
Journal of Theoretical Biology, January 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.jtbi.2015.01.002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew Spencer

Abstract

Measures of biodiversity change such as the Living Planet Index describe proportional change in the abundance of a typical species, which can be thought of as change in the size of a community. Here, I discuss the orthogonal concept of change in relative abundances, which I refer to as shape change. To be logically consistent, a measure of the rate of shape change should be scaling invariant (have the same value for all data with the same vector of proportional change over a given time interval), but existing measures do not have this property. I derive a new, scaling invariant measure. I show that this new measure and existing measures of biodiversity change such as the Living Planet Index describe different aspects of dynamics. I show that neither body size nor environmental variability need affects the rate of shape change. I extend the measure to deal with colonizations and extinctions, using the surreal number system. I give examples using data on hoverflies in a garden in Leicester, UK, and the higher plant community of Surtsey. I hypothesize that phylogenetically restricted assemblages will show a higher proportion of size change than diverse communities.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 6%
France 2 6%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 30 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 26%
Student > Master 8 23%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 43%
Environmental Science 6 17%
Engineering 2 6%
Physics and Astronomy 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 4 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 44. 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 16 December 2015.
All research outputs
#948,737
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Theoretical Biology
#72
of 4,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,303
of 359,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Theoretical Biology
#2
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,010 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 359,810 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 96% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.