| Title |
CO2 and inorganic nutrient enrichment affect the performance of a calcifying green alga and its noncalcifying epiphyte
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Oecologia, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00442-015-3242-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laurie C. Hofmann, Kai Bischof, Cecilia Baggini, Andrew Johnson, Ketil Koop-Jakobsen, Mirta Teichberg |
| Abstract |
Ocean acidification studies in the past decade have greatly improved our knowledge of how calcifying organisms respond to increased surface ocean CO2 levels. It has become evident that, for many organisms, nutrient availability is an important factor that influences their physiological responses and competitive interactions with other species. Therefore, we tested how simulated ocean acidification and eutrophication (nitrate and phosphate enrichment) interact to affect the physiology and ecology of a calcifying chlorophyte macroalga (Halimeda opuntia (L.) J.V. Lamouroux) and its common noncalcifying epiphyte (Dictyota sp.) in a 4-week fully crossed multifactorial experiment. Inorganic nutrient enrichment (+NP) had a strong influence on all responses measured with the exception of net calcification. Elevated CO2 alone significantly decreased electron transport rates of the photosynthetic apparatus and resulted in phosphorus limitation in both species, but had no effect on oxygen production or respiration. The combination of CO2 and +NP significantly increased electron transport rates in both species. While +NP alone stimulated H. opuntia growth rates, Dictyota growth was significantly stimulated by nutrient enrichment only at elevated CO2, which led to the highest biomass ratios of Dictyota to Halimeda. Our results suggest that inorganic nutrient enrichment alone stimulates several aspects of H. opuntia physiology, but nutrient enrichment at a CO2 concentration predicted for the end of the century benefits Dictyota sp. and hinders its calcifying basibiont H. opuntia. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 83 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 25 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 28% |
| Environmental Science | 18 | 21% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 32 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 20 February 2015.
All research outputs
#5,641,390
of 22,785,242 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#1,155
of 4,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,434
of 352,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#14
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,785,242 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,210 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 352,279 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.