↓ Skip to main content

Differences in soil biological activity by terrain types at the sub-field scale in central Iowa US

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Differences in soil biological activity by terrain types at the sub-field scale in central Iowa US
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0180596
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Soil microbial communities are structured by biogeochemical processes that occur at many different spatial scales, which makes soil sampling difficult. Because soil microbial communities are important in nutrient cycling and soil fertility, it is important to understand how microbial communities function within the heterogeneous soil landscape. In this study, a self-organizing map was used to determine whether landscape data can be used to characterize the distribution of microbial biomass and activity in order to provide an improved understanding of soil microbial community function. Points within a row crop field in south-central Iowa were clustered via a self-organizing map using six landscape properties into three separate landscape clusters. Twelve sampling locations per cluster were chosen for a total of 36 locations. After the soil samples were collected, the samples were then analysed for various metabolic indicators, such as nitrogen and carbon mineralization, extractable organic carbon, microbial biomass, etc. It was found that sampling locations located in the potholes and toe slope positions had significantly greater microbial biomass nitrogen and carbon, total carbon, total nitrogen and extractable organic carbon than the other two landscape position clusters, while locations located on the upslope did not differ significantly from the other landscape clusters. However, factors such as nitrate, ammonia, and nitrogen and carbon mineralization did not differ significantly across the landscape. Overall, this research demonstrates the effectiveness of a terrain-based clustering method for guiding soil sampling of microbial communities.

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 9 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 22 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 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 23%
Student > Master 5 23%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 5 23%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 41%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 9%
Engineering 2 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 5%
Environmental Science 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 5 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 08 January 2020.
All research outputs
#6,839,009
of 32,973,893 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#65,175
of 218,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,249
of 349,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,260
of 4,294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,973,893 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 218,844 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 349,967 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,294 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 70% of its contemporaries.