↓ Skip to main content

Enrichment scale determines herbivore control of primary producers

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#37 of 4,220)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Enrichment scale determines herbivore control of primary producers
Published in
Oecologia, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00442-015-3505-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael A. Gil, Jing Jiao, Craig W. Osenberg

Abstract

Anthropogenic nutrient enrichment stimulates primary production and threatens natural communities worldwide. Herbivores may counteract deleterious effects of enrichment by increasing their consumption of primary producers. However, field tests of herbivore control are often done by adding nutrients at small (e.g., sub-meter) scales, while enrichment in real systems often occurs at much larger scales (e.g., kilometers). Therefore, experimental results may be driven by processes that are not relevant at larger scales. Using a mathematical model, we show that herbivores can control primary producer biomass in experiments by concentrating their foraging in small enriched plots; however, at larger, realistic scales, the same mechanism may not lead to herbivore control of primary producers. Instead, other demographic mechanisms are required, but these are not examined in most field studies (and may not operate in many systems). This mismatch between experiments and natural processes suggests that many ecosystems may be less resilient to degradation via enrichment than previously believed.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Mexico 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 50 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 22%
Student > Master 10 19%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 7 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 54%
Environmental Science 13 24%
Linguistics 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 78. 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 13 March 2016.
All research outputs
#464,160
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#37
of 4,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,536
of 281,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#2
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,220 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 281,499 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 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 96% of its contemporaries.