↓ Skip to main content

Harbor networks as introduction gateways: contrasting distribution patterns of native and introduced ascidians

Overview of attention for article published in Biological Invasions, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 Mendeley
Title
Harbor networks as introduction gateways: contrasting distribution patterns of native and introduced ascidians
Published in
Biological Invasions, December 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10530-014-0821-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susanna López-Legentil, Miquel L. Legentil, Patrick M. Erwin, Xavier Turon

Abstract

Harbors and marinas are well known gateways for species introductions in marine environments but little work has been done to ascertain relationships between species diversity, harbor type, and geographic distance to uncover patterns of secondary spread. Here, we sampled ascidians from 32 harbors along ca. 300 km of the NW Mediterranean coast and investigated patterns of distribution and spread related to harbor type (marina, fishing, commercial) and geographic location using multivariate techniques. In total, 28 ascidians were identified at the species level and another 9 at the genus level based on morphology and genetic barcoding. Eight species were assigned to introduced forms, 15 were given native status and 5 were classified as cryptogenic. Aplidium accarense was reported for the first time in the Mediterranean Sea and was especially abundant in 23 of the harbors. Introduced and cryptogenic species were abundant in most of the surveyed harbors, while native forms were rare and restricted to a few harbors. Significant differences in the distribution of ascidians according to harbor type and latitudinal position were observed. These differences were due to the distribution of introduced species. We obtained a significant correlation between geographic distance and ascidian composition, indicating that closely located harbors shared more ascidian species among them. This study showed that harbors act as dispersal strongholds for introduced species, with native species only appearing sporadically, and that harbor type and geographic location should also be considered when developing management plans to constrain the spread of non-indigenous species in highly urbanized coastlines.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 133 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 31 22%
Student > Master 26 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Other 7 5%
Other 27 19%
Unknown 17 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 68 49%
Environmental Science 34 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 5%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 1%
Chemistry 2 1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 20 14%
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 26 May 2015.
All research outputs
#20,278,422
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from Biological Invasions
#2,247
of 2,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#302,736
of 361,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Invasions
#20
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,335 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 361,392 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.