↓ Skip to main content

Light respiration by subtropical seaweeds

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Phycology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

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
Light respiration by subtropical seaweeds
Published in
Journal of Phycology, April 2017
DOI 10.1111/jpy.12533
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Here we report the first-ever measurements of light CO2 respiration rate (CRR) by seaweeds. We measured the influence of temperature (15 to 25°C) and light (irradiance from 60 to 670 μmol · m(-2) · s(-1) ) on the light CCR of two subtropical seaweed species, and measured the CRR of seven different seaweed species under the same light (150 μmol · m(-2) · s(-1) ) and temperature (25°C). There was little effect of irradiance on light CRR, but there was an effect of temperature. Across the seven species light CRR was similar to OCR (oxygen consumption rate in the dark), with the exception of a single species. The outlier species was a coralline alga, and the higher light CRR was probably driven by calcification. CRR could be estimated from OCR, as well as carbon photosynthetic rates from oxygen photosynthetic rates, which suggests that previous studies have probably provided good estimations of gross photosynthesis for seaweeds. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

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 7 30%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Master 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Other 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 6 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 26%
Environmental Science 5 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 4%
Unknown 9 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 27 June 2017.
All research outputs
#12,741,754
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Phycology
#1,174
of 1,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,414
of 310,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Phycology
#7
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,751 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 310,335 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 65% of its contemporaries.