↓ Skip to main content

Directed movement changes coexistence outcomes in heterogeneous environments

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology Letters, November 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Readers on

mendeley
23 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.
Article details
Title
Directed movement changes coexistence outcomes in heterogeneous environments
Published in
Ecology Letters, November 2021
DOI 10.1111/ele.13925
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Understanding mechanisms of coexistence is a central topic in ecology. Mathematical analysis of models of competition between two identical species moving at different rates of symmetric diffusion in heterogeneous environments show that the slower mover excludes the faster one. The models have not been tested empirically and lack inclusions of a component of directed movement toward favourable areas. To address these gaps, we extended previous theory by explicitly including exploitable resource dynamics and directed movement. We tested the mathematical results experimentally using laboratory populations of the nematode worm, Caenorhabditis elegans. Our results not only support the previous theory that the species diffusing at a slower rate prevails in heterogeneous environments but also reveal that moderate levels of a directed movement component on top of the diffusive movement allow species to coexist. Our results broaden the theory of species coexistence in heterogeneous space and provide empirical confirmation of the mathematical predictions.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 22%
Researcher 5 22%
Other 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 35%
Environmental Science 4 17%
Chemistry 2 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 4%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 11 February 2022.
All research outputs
#2,768,806
of 33,203,211 outputs
Outputs from Ecology Letters
#1,245
of 3,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,488
of 559,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology Letters
#19
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,203,211 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 3,738 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 559,834 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.