↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Shifting Regimes and Changing Interactions in the Lake Washington, U.S.A., Plankton Community from 1962–1994
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0110363
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Understanding how changing climate, nutrient regimes, and invasive species shift food web structure is critically important in ecology. Most analytical approaches, however, assume static species interactions and environmental effects across time. Therefore, we applied multivariate autoregressive (MAR) models in a moving window context to test for shifting plankton community interactions and effects of environmental variables on plankton abundance in Lake Washington, U.S.A. from 1962-1994, following reduced nutrient loading in the 1960s and the rise of Daphnia in the 1970s. The moving-window MAR (mwMAR) approach showed shifts in the strengths of interactions between Daphnia, a dominant grazer, and other plankton taxa between a high nutrient, Oscillatoria-dominated regime and a low nutrient, Daphnia-dominated regime. The approach also highlighted the inhibiting influence of the cyanobacterium Oscillatoria on other plankton taxa in the community. Overall community stability was lowest during the period of elevated nutrient loading and Oscillatoria dominance. Despite recent warming of the lake, we found no evidence that anomalous temperatures impacted plankton abundance. Our results suggest mwMAR modeling is a useful approach that can be applied across diverse ecosystems, when questions involve shifting relationships within food webs, and among species and abiotic drivers.

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 6 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 93 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 %
United States 5 5%
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 86 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 24%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Master 9 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 4%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 13 14%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 30 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 30%
Engineering 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 20 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 2015.
All research outputs
#10,723,504
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#91,665
of 224,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,714
of 307,609 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,085
of 5,421 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,661 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 307,609 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,421 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 59% of its contemporaries.