↓ Skip to main content

Early development and substrate twine selection for the cultivation of Sargassum muticum (Yendo) Fensholt under laboratory conditions

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Applied Phycology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Early development and substrate twine selection for the cultivation of Sargassum muticum (Yendo) Fensholt under laboratory conditions
Published in
Journal of Applied Phycology, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10811-018-1459-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hau Nhu Le, Adam D. Hughes, Philip D. Kerrison

Abstract

The phaeophyte macroalgae Sargassum muticum is under investigation as a cultivation crop within its native range in SE Asia, alongside other members of the Sargassum genus. During the critical hatchery phase, germlings are grown to ≥ several millimeters ready for outplanting. By optimising the growth medium and twine substrate used for the germling attachment, hatcheries can become more efficient and cost-effective. An 8-week replicated laboratory experiment investigated these factors. It found that adding 0.125 mL L-1 of saturated germanium dioxide during the first week increased mean germling size by 23% (p < 0.005), whereas additional nutrients in the form of F/2 medium made no difference (p > 0.05). Six twine substrates were also tested: jute, cotton, polyamide/cotton, polyester, polyvinyl alcohol and polypropylene. Sargassum muticum grew similarly well on all, although attachment success during the first week was highest on the rougher natural fibres, particularly jute. A negative density-dependent effect of germling density on growth was seen across all materials, with the highest growth seen on the materials with the lowest germling density. Jute is recommended as a highly suitable substrate for hatchery cultivation in this species, although the initial density should be carefully controlled to prevent intraspecific competition.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 16 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 30%
Environmental Science 5 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Chemical Engineering 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 17 46%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,945,904
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Applied Phycology
#1,053
of 2,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,981
of 326,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Applied Phycology
#25
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,562 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 326,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 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 62% of its contemporaries.