↓ Skip to main content

Benefits of the destinations, not costs of the journeys, shape partial migration patterns

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Animal Ecology, May 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 (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Benefits of the destinations, not costs of the journeys, shape partial migration patterns
Published in
Journal of Animal Ecology, May 2017
DOI 10.1111/1365-2656.12679
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charles B. Yackulic, Stephen Blake, Guillaume Bastille‐Rousseau

Abstract

1.The reasons that lead some animals to seasonally migrate, and others to remain in the same area year-round, are poorly understood. Associations between traits, such as body size, and migration provide clues. For example, larger species and individuals are more likely to migrate. 2.One explanation for this size bias in migration is that larger animals are capable of moving faster (movement hypothesis). However, body size is linked to many other biological processes. For instance, the energetic balances of larger animals are generally more sensitive to variation in food density because of body size effects on foraging and metabolism and this sensitivity could drive migratory decisions (forage hypothesis). 3.Identifying the primary selective forces that drive migration ultimately requires quantifying fitness impacts over the full annual migratory cycle. Here, we develop a full annual migratory cycle model from metabolic and foraging theory to compare the importance of the forage and movement hypotheses. We parameterize the model for Galapagos tortoises, which were recently discovered to be size-dependent altitudinal migrants. 4.The model predicts phenomena not included in model development including maximum body sizes, the body size at which individuals begin to migrate, and the seasonal timing of migration and these predictions generally agree with available data. Scenarios strongly support the forage hypothesis over the movement hypothesis. Furthermore, male Galapagos tortoises on Santa Cruz Island would be unable to grow to their enormous sizes without access to both highlands and lowlands. 5.Whereas recent research has focused on links between traits and the migratory phases of the migratory cycle, we find that effects of body size on the non-migratory phases are far more important determinants of the propensity to migrate. Larger animals are more sensitive to changing forage conditions than smaller animals with implications for maintenance of migration and body size in the face of environmental change. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 26%
Researcher 10 18%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 11 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 53%
Environmental Science 9 16%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 13 23%

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 05 September 2017.
All research outputs
#3,423,609
of 17,911,762 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Animal Ecology
#1,038
of 2,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,272
of 275,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Animal Ecology
#39
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,911,762 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,611 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 275,171 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.