↓ Skip to main content

Differentiating moss from higher plants is critical in studying the carbon cycle of the boreal biome

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
Differentiating moss from higher plants is critical in studying the carbon cycle of the boreal biome
Published in
Nature Communications, June 2014
DOI 10.1038/ncomms5270
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wenping Yuan, Shuguang Liu, Wenjie Dong, Shunlin Liang, Shuqing Zhao, Jingming Chen, Wenfang Xu, Xianglan Li, Alan Barr, T. Andrew Black, Wende Yan, Mike L. Goulden, Liisa Kulmala, Anders Lindroth, Hank A. Margolis, Yojiro Matsuura, Eddy Moors, Michiel van der Molen, Takeshi Ohta, Kim Pilegaard, Andrej Varlagin, Timo Vesala

Abstract

The satellite-derived normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), which is used for estimating gross primary production (GPP), often includes contributions from both mosses and vascular plants in boreal ecosystems. For the same NDVI, moss can generate only about one-third of the GPP that vascular plants can because of its much lower photosynthetic capacity. Here, based on eddy covariance measurements, we show that the difference in photosynthetic capacity between these two plant functional types has never been explicitly included when estimating regional GPP in the boreal region, resulting in a substantial overestimation. The magnitude of this overestimation could have important implications regarding a change from a current carbon sink to a carbon source in the boreal region. Moss abundance, associated with ecosystem disturbances, needs to be mapped and incorporated into GPP estimates in order to adequately assess the role of the boreal region in the global carbon cycle.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 2%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 82 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 32%
Researcher 15 18%
Student > Master 11 13%
Other 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 12 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 30 35%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 16 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 14%
Physics and Astronomy 3 4%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 16 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 16 July 2015.
All research outputs
#2,176,201
of 21,340,745 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#23,106
of 42,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,497
of 202,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#15
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,340,745 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 42,461 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.0. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 202,592 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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 62% of its contemporaries.