| Title |
Status of the Southern Carpathian forests in the long-term ecological research network
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10661-011-2515-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ovidiu Badea, Andrzej Bytnerowicz, Diana Silaghi, Stefan Neagu, Ion Barbu, Carmen Iacoban, Corneliu Iacob, Gheorghe Guiman, Elena Preda, Ioan Seceleanu, Marian Oneata, Ion Dumitru, Viorela Huber, Horia Iuncu, Lucian Dinca, Stefan Leca, Ioan Taut |
| Abstract |
Air pollution, bulk precipitation, throughfall, soil condition, foliar nutrients, as well as forest health and growth were studied in 2006-2009 in a long-term ecological research (LTER) network in the Bucegi Mountains, Romania. Ozone (O(3)) was high indicating a potential for phytotoxicity. Ammonia (NH(3)) concentrations rose to levels that could contribute to deposition of nutritional nitrogen (N) and could affect biodiversity changes. Higher that 50% contribution of acidic rain (pH < 5.5) contributed to increased acidity of forest soils. Foliar N concentrations for Norway spruce (Picea abies), Silver fir (Abies alba), Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris), and European beech (Fagus sylvatica) were normal, phosphorus (P) was high, while those of potassium (K), magnesium (Mg), and especially of manganese (Mn) were significantly below the typical European or Carpathian region levels. The observed nutritional imbalance could have negative effects on forest trees. Health of forests was moderately affected, with damaged trees (crown defoliation >25%) higher than 30%. The observed crown damage was accompanied by the annual volume losses for the entire research forest area up to 25.4%. High diversity and evenness specific to the stand type's structures and local climate conditions were observed within the herbaceous layer, indicating that biodiversity of the vascular plant communities was not compromised. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 38% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 35% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 27% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 27% |
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 12 January 2012.
All research outputs
#21,358,731
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#2,266
of 2,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,180
of 248,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#11
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 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 2,748 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. 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 248,972 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 13 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.