↓ Skip to main content

Predicting invasion in grassland ecosystems: is exotic dominance the real embarrassment of richness?

Overview of attention for article published in Global Change Biology, October 2013
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 (79th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
253 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
Predicting invasion in grassland ecosystems: is exotic dominance the real embarrassment of richness?
Published in
Global Change Biology, October 2013
DOI 10.1111/gcb.12370
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric W. Seabloom, Elizabeth T. Borer, Yvonne Buckley, Elsa E. Cleland, Kendi Davies, Jennifer Firn, W. Stanley Harpole, Yann Hautier, Eric Lind, Andrew MacDougall, John L. Orrock, Suzanne M. Prober, Peter Adler, Juan Alberti, T. Michael Anderson, Jonathan D. Bakker, Lori A. Biederman, Dana Blumenthal, Cynthia S. Brown, Lars A. Brudvig, Maria Caldeira, Chengjin Chu, Michael J. Crawley, Pedro Daleo, Ellen I. Damschen, Carla M. D'Antonio, Nicole M. DeCrappeo, Chris R. Dickman, Guozhen Du, Philip A. Fay, Paul Frater, Daniel S. Gruner, Nicole Hagenah, Andrew Hector, Aveliina Helm, Helmut Hillebrand, Kirsten S. Hofmockel, Hope C. Humphries, Oscar Iribarne, Virginia L. Jin, Adam Kay, Kevin P. Kirkman, Julia A. Klein, Johannes M. H. Knops, Kimberly J. La Pierre, Laura M. Ladwig, John G. Lambrinos, Andrew D. B. Leakey, Qi Li, Wei Li, Rebecca McCulley, Brett Melbourne, Charles E. Mitchell, Joslin L. Moore, John Morgan, Brent Mortensen, Lydia R. O'Halloran, Meelis Pärtel, Jesús Pascual, David A. Pyke, Anita C. Risch, Roberto Salguero-Gómez, Mahesh Sankaran, Martin Schuetz, Anna Simonsen, Melinda Smith, Carly Stevens, Lauren Sullivan, Glenda M. Wardle, Elizabeth M. Wolkovich, Peter D. Wragg, Justin Wright, Louie Yang

Abstract

Invasions have increased the size of regional species pools, but are typically assumed to reduce native diversity. However, global-scale tests of this assumption have been elusive because of the focus on exotic species richness, rather than relative abundance. This is problematic because low invader richness can indicate invasion resistance by the native community or, alternatively, dominance by a single exotic species. Here, we used a globally replicated study to quantify relationships between exotic richness and abundance in grass-dominated ecosystems in 13 countries on six continents, ranging from salt marshes to alpine tundra. We tested effects of human land use, native community diversity, herbivore pressure, and nutrient limitation on exotic plant dominance. Despite its widespread use, exotic richness was a poor proxy for exotic dominance at low exotic richness, because sites that contained few exotic species ranged from relatively pristine (low exotic richness and cover) to almost completely exotic-dominated ones (low exotic richness but high exotic cover). Both exotic cover and richness were predicted by native plant diversity (native grass richness) and land use (distance to cultivation). Although climate was important for predicting both exotic cover and richness, climatic factors predicting cover (precipitation variability) differed from those predicting richness (maximum temperature and mean temperature in the wettest quarter). Herbivory and nutrient limitation did not predict exotic richness or cover. Exotic dominance was greatest in areas with low native grass richness at the site- or regional-scale. Although this could reflect native grass displacement, a lack of biotic resistance is a more likely explanation, given that grasses comprise the most aggressive invaders. These findings underscore the need to move beyond richness as a surrogate for the extent of invasion, because this metric confounds monodominance with invasion resistance. Monitoring species' relative abundance will more rapidly advance our understanding of invasions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 253 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
Switzerland 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Unknown 238 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 66 26%
Researcher 58 23%
Student > Master 30 12%
Student > Bachelor 20 8%
Professor 16 6%
Other 44 17%
Unknown 19 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 142 56%
Environmental Science 72 28%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 12 5%
Computer Science 3 1%
Arts and Humanities 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 21 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 07 November 2014.
All research outputs
#2,729,330
of 12,353,915 outputs
Outputs from Global Change Biology
#1,994
of 3,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,915
of 155,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Change Biology
#52
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,353,915 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.2. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 155,055 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.