| Title |
Density dependence: an ecological Tower of Babel
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Oecologia, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00442-012-2347-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Salvador Herrando-Pérez, Steven Delean, Barry W. Brook, Corey J. A. Bradshaw |
| Abstract |
The concept of density dependence represents the effect of changing population size on demographic rates and captures the demographic role of social and trophic mechanisms (e.g. competition, cooperation, parasitism or predation). Ecologists have coined more than 60 terms to denote different statistical and semantic properties of this concept, resulting in a formidable lexicon of synonymies and polysemies. We have examined the vocabulary of density dependence used in the modern ecological literature from the foundational lexicon developed by Smith, Allee, Haldane, Neave and Varley. A few simple rules suffice to abate terminological inconsistency and to enhance the biological meaning of this important concept. Correct citation of original references by ecologists and research journals could ameliorate terminological standards in our discipline and avoid linguistic confusion of mathematically and theoretically complex patterns. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 311 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 10 | 3% |
| Brazil | 9 | 3% |
| Canada | 5 | 2% |
| France | 4 | 1% |
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| Sweden | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Ecuador | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 2% |
| Unknown | 267 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 83 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 72 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 35 | 11% |
| Professor | 20 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 6% |
| Other | 55 | 18% |
| Unknown | 26 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 189 | 61% |
| Environmental Science | 69 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 2% |
| Linguistics | 2 | <1% |
| Mathematics | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 9 | 3% |
| Unknown | 34 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 November 2018.
All research outputs
#2,022,650
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#308
of 4,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,423
of 165,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,202 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 165,196 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.