↓ Skip to main content

To spend or to save? Assessing energetic growth-storage tradeoffs in native and invasive woody plants

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
To spend or to save? Assessing energetic growth-storage tradeoffs in native and invasive woody plants
Published in
Oecologia, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00442-018-4177-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elise D. Hinman, Jason D. Fridley

Abstract

Many non-native woody plants invade low-light forest understories but differ from native species in leaf phenology and seasonality of photosynthesis. It is unknown whether such differences in assimilation patterns are due to contrasting strategies of energy allocation. In a group of native and invasive species in Eastern North America, we hypothesized that invaders employ a grow-first strategy, prioritizing allocation to new structural biomass over carbon storage compared to native congeners. We also hypothesized that species producing a single spring leaf flush exhibit a more conservative carbon storage strategy than species with continuous leaf production. We measured sugar and starch concentrations (non-structural carbohydrates; NSCs) in spring and fall in the stems and roots of 39 species of native and non-native shrubs in a common garden, and compared these to patterns of leaf production across species. Native species had higher soluble sugar concentrations than invaders, but invaders tended to store more root starch in spring. We found no difference in leaf production between natives and invaders. Determinate species had more soluble sugars than indeterminate species but had lower root starch. We found no relationship between aboveground productivity and carbon storage. Our results suggest that closely related species with contrasting evolutionary histories have different carbon storage strategies, although not necessarily in relation to their growth potential. The higher soluble sugar concentrations of native species may reflect their evolutionary response to historical disturbances, or different interactions with soil microbes, while increased spring root starch in invaders may support fine root or fruit production.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 29%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 53%
Environmental Science 4 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 7 21%
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 19 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,637,483
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#3,670
of 4,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,591
of 329,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#67
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,242 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 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 329,367 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.