↓ Skip to main content

A Generic Individual-Based Spatially Explicit Model as a Novel Tool for Investigating Insect-Plant Interactions: A Case Study of the Behavioural Ecology of Frugivorous Tephritidae

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Generic Individual-Based Spatially Explicit Model as a Novel Tool for Investigating Insect-Plant Interactions: A Case Study of the Behavioural Ecology of Frugivorous Tephritidae
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0151777
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ming Wang, Bronwen Cribb, Anthony R. Clarke, Jim Hanan

Abstract

Computational modelling of mechanisms underlying processes in the real world can be of great value in understanding complex biological behaviours. Uptake in general biology and ecology has been rapid. However, it often requires specific data sets that are overly costly in time and resources to collect. The aim of the current study was to test whether a generic behavioural ecology model constructed using published data could give realistic outputs for individual species. An individual-based model was developed using the Pattern-Oriented Modelling (POM) strategy and protocol, based on behavioural rules associated with insect movement choices. Frugivorous Tephritidae (fruit flies) were chosen because of economic significance in global agriculture and the multiple published data sets available for a range of species. The Queensland fruit fly (Qfly), Bactrocera tryoni, was identified as a suitable individual species for testing. Plant canopies with modified architecture were used to run predictive simulations. A field study was then conducted to validate our model predictions on how plant architecture affects fruit flies' behaviours. Characteristics of plant architecture such as different shapes, e.g., closed-canopy and vase-shaped, affected fly movement patterns and time spent on host fruit. The number of visits to host fruit also differed between the edge and centre in closed-canopy plants. Compared to plant architecture, host fruit has less contribution to effects on flies' movement patterns. The results from this model, combined with our field study and published empirical data suggest that placing fly traps in the upper canopy at the edge should work best. Such a modelling approach allows rapid testing of ideas about organismal interactions with environmental substrates in silico rather than in vivo, to generate new perspectives. Using published data provides a saving in time and resources. Adjustments for specific questions can be achieved by refinement of parameters based on targeted experiments.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 22%
Researcher 6 19%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Professor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 7 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 41%
Mathematics 3 9%
Environmental Science 2 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 8 25%
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 22 March 2016.
All research outputs
#17,793,546
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#147,553
of 194,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,098
of 299,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#4,014
of 5,372 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 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 194,934 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 299,504 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,372 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.