↓ Skip to main content

Seasonality and facilitation drive tree establishment in a semi-arid floodplain savanna

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Seasonality and facilitation drive tree establishment in a semi-arid floodplain savanna
Published in
Oecologia, January 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00442-014-2886-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Megan K. Good, Peter J. Clarke, Jodi N. Price, Nick Reid

Abstract

A popular hypothesis for tree and grass coexistence in savannas is that tree seedlings are limited by competition from grasses. However, competition may be important in favourable climatic conditions when abiotic stress is low, whereas facilitation may be more important under stressful conditions. Seasonal and inter-annual fluctuations in abiotic conditions may alter the outcome of tree-grass interactions in savanna systems and contribute to coexistence. We investigated interactions between coolibah (Eucalyptus coolabah) tree seedlings and perennial C4 grasses in semi-arid savannas in eastern Australia in contrasting seasonal conditions. In glasshouse and field experiments, we measured survival and growth of tree seedlings with different densities of C4 grasses across seasons. In warm glasshouse conditions, where water was not limiting, competition from grasses reduced tree seedling growth but did not affect tree survival. In the field, all tree seedlings died in hot dry summer conditions irrespective of grass or shade cover, whereas in winter, facilitation from grasses significantly increased tree seedling survival by ameliorating heat stress and protecting seedlings from herbivory. We demonstrated that interactions between tree seedlings and perennial grasses vary seasonally, and timing of tree germination may determine the importance of facilitation or competition in structuring savanna vegetation because of fluctuations in abiotic stress. Our finding that trees can grow and survive in a dense C4 grass sward contrasts with the common perception that grass competition limits woody plant recruitment in savannas.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 5%
India 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
Unknown 37 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Professor 4 10%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 17 41%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 29%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 February 2014.
All research outputs
#15,291,764
of 22,741,406 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#3,248
of 4,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,199
of 308,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#30
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,741,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,208 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 308,137 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.