↓ Skip to main content

Spatial complexity reduces interaction strengths in the meta‐food web of a river floodplain mosaic

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 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
Spatial complexity reduces interaction strengths in the meta‐food web of a river floodplain mosaic
Published in
Ecology, January 2015
DOI 10.1890/14-0733.1
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Ryan Bellmore, Colden V. Baxter, Patrick J. Connolly

Abstract

Theory states that both the spatial complexity of landscapes and the strength of interactions between consumers and their resources are important for maintaining biodiversity and the balance of nature. Spatial complexity is hypothesized to promote biodiversity by reducing the potential for competitive exclusion; whereas, models show that weak trophic interactions can enhance stability and maintain biodiversity by dampening destabilizing oscillations associated with strong interactions. Here, we show that spatial complexity can reduce the strength of consumer-resource interactions in natural food webs. By sequentially aggregating food webs of individual aquatic habitat patches across a floodplain mosaic, we found that increasing spatial complexity resulted in decreases in the strength of interactions between predators and prey, owing to a greater proportion of weak interactions and a reduced proportion of strong interactions in the meta-food web. The main mechanism behind this pattern was that some patches provided predation refugia for species that were often strongly preyed upon in other patches. If weak trophic interactions do indeed promote stability, then our findings may signal an additional mechanism by which complexity and stability are linked in nature. In turn, this may have implications for how the values of landscape complexity, and the costs of biophysical homogenization, are assessed.

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 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
United States 2 1%
France 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 129 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 31 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 20%
Student > Master 24 18%
Student > Bachelor 14 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Other 22 16%
Unknown 7 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 71 52%
Environmental Science 42 31%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 <1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 <1%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 14 10%
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 October 2015.
All research outputs
#17,285,933
of 25,380,192 outputs
Outputs from Ecology
#5,851
of 6,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,196
of 357,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology
#56
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,380,192 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,946 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 357,878 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.