↓ Skip to main content

Weaker resource diffusion effect at coarser spatial scales observed for egg distribution of cabbage white butterflies

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Weaker resource diffusion effect at coarser spatial scales observed for egg distribution of cabbage white butterflies
Published in
Oecologia, October 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00442-014-3103-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc Hasenbank, Stephen Hartley

Abstract

Mobile organisms frequently forage for patchy resources; e.g. herbivorous insects searching for host plants. The resource diffusion hypothesis predicts that insect herbivores, such as Pieris rapae butterflies, are disproportionally attracted to more isolated, or 'diffused', host plants. Surprisingly little is known about how this response to variation in resource density manifests itself at different spatial scales. We measured the outcome of oviposition by P. rapae butterflies foraging among groups of host plants, with plant density experimentally varied to achieve comparability between three nested scales: fine (1 × 1 m), medium (6 × 6 m), and coarse (36 × 36 m). Hierarchical linear models were used to measure density-dependent responses in the number of eggs laid per plant, with plant density measured at nested spatial scales. At a fine scale, isolated plants received significantly more eggs, while at medium and coarse scales the differences were less pronounced, and tended towards a neutral distribution of eggs across plants. Larger plants also tended to receive more eggs. Since multiple processes, acting at multiple scales, are likely to be the rule rather than the exception in ecology, methods for detecting and characterising multi-scale responses are important to ensure a robust transfer of ecological models from one situation to another.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 27%
Researcher 3 20%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Postgraduate 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 53%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Environmental Science 1 7%
Unknown 5 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 11 October 2017.
All research outputs
#6,942,701
of 22,765,347 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#1,519
of 4,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,038
of 254,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#20
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,765,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,210 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 254,867 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.