↓ Skip to main content

Old-Growth Forests Can Accumulate Carbon in Soils

Overview of attention for article published in Science, December 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
9 tweeters
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
366 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
369 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
Old-Growth Forests Can Accumulate Carbon in Soils
Published in
Science, December 2006
DOI 10.1126/science.1130168
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guoyi Zhou, Shuguang Liu, Zhian Li, Deqiang Zhang, Xuli Tang, Chuanyan Zhou, Junhua Yan, Jiangming Mo

Abstract

Old-growth forests have traditionally been considered negligible as carbon sinks because carbon uptake has been thought to be balanced by respiration. We show that the top 20-centimeter soil layer in preserved old-growth forests in southern China accumulated atmospheric carbon at an unexpectedly high average rate of 0.61 megagrams of carbon hectare-1 year-1 from 1979 to 2003. This study suggests that the carbon cycle processes in the belowground system of these forests are changing in response to the changing environment. The result directly challenges the prevailing belief in ecosystem ecology regarding carbon budget in old-growth forests and supports the establishment of a new, nonequilibrium conceptual framework to study soil carbon dynamics.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 369 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 10 3%
China 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 342 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 92 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 54 15%
Student > Master 47 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 31 8%
Professor 29 8%
Other 68 18%
Unknown 48 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 130 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 93 25%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 44 12%
Engineering 9 2%
Social Sciences 5 1%
Other 18 5%
Unknown 70 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 14 April 2022.
All research outputs
#1,081,473
of 22,491,736 outputs
Outputs from Science
#19,438
of 77,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,087
of 154,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#50
of 320 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,491,736 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 77,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 61.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 154,081 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 320 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.