↓ Skip to main content

Impacts of an Invasive Non-Native Annual Weed, Impatiens glandulifera, on Above- and Below-Ground Invertebrate Communities in the United Kingdom

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
20 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 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.
Title
Impacts of an Invasive Non-Native Annual Weed, Impatiens glandulifera, on Above- and Below-Ground Invertebrate Communities in the United Kingdom
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0067271
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert A. Tanner, Sonal Varia, René Eschen, Suzy Wood, Sean T. Murphy, Alan C. Gange

Abstract

Vegetation community composition and the above- and below-ground invertebrate communities are linked intrinsically, though few studies have assessed the impact of non-native plants on both these parts of the community together. We evaluated the differences in the above- (foliage- and ground-dwelling) and below-ground invertebrate communities in nine uninvaded plots and nine plots invaded by the annual invasive species Impatiens glandulifera, in the UK during 2007 and 2008. Over 139,000 invertebrates were identified into distinct taxa and categorised into functional feeding groups. The impact of I. glandulifera on the vegetation and invertebrate community composition was evaluated using multivariate statistics including principal response curves (PRC) and redundancy analysis (RDA). In the foliage-dwelling community, all functional feeding groups were less abundant in the invaded plots, and the species richness of Coleoptera and Heteroptera was significantly reduced. In the ground-dwelling community, herbivores, detritivores, and predators were all significantly less abundant in the invaded plots. In contrast, these functional groups in the below-ground community appeared to be largely unaffected, and even positively associated with the presence of I. glandulifera. Although the cover of I. glandulifera decreased in the invaded plots in the second year of the study, only the below-ground invertebrate community showed a significant response. These results indicate that the above- and below-ground invertebrate communities respond differently to the presence of I. glandulifera, and these community shifts can potentially lead to a habitat less biologically diverse than surrounding native communities; which could have negative impacts on higher trophic levels and ecosystem functioning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 137 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 35 24%
Student > Master 28 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Researcher 14 10%
Other 8 6%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 27 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 73 51%
Environmental Science 25 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Computer Science 2 1%
Chemical Engineering 1 <1%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 35 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,278,491
of 26,038,372 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#15,962
of 227,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,320
of 208,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#421
of 4,825 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,038,372 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 227,351 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. 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 208,924 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,825 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.