↓ Skip to main content

What to eat in a warming world: do increased temperatures necessitate hazardous duty pay?

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, November 2017
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
What to eat in a warming world: do increased temperatures necessitate hazardous duty pay?
Published in
Oecologia, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00442-017-3993-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

L. Embere Hall, Anna D. Chalfoun

Abstract

Contemporary climate change affects nearly all biomes, causing shifts in animal distributions and resource availability. Changes in resource selection may allow individuals to offset climatic stress, thereby providing a mechanism for persistence amidst warming conditions. Whereas the role of predation risk in food choice has been studied broadly, the extent to which individuals respond to thermoregulatory risk by changing resource preferences is unclear. We addressed whether individuals compensated for temperature-related reductions in foraging time by altering forage preferences, using the American pika (Ochotona princeps) as a model species. We tested two hypotheses: (1) food-quality hypothesis-individuals exposed to temperature extremes should select higher-quality vegetation in return for accepting a physiologically riskier feeding situation; and (2) food-availability hypothesis-individuals exposed to temperature extremes should prioritize foraging quickly, thereby decreasing selection for higher-quality food. We quantified the composition and quality (% moisture, % nitrogen, and fiber content) of available and harvested vegetation, and deployed a network of temperature sensors to measure in situ conditions for 30 individuals, during July-Sept., 2015. Individuals exposed to more extreme daytime temperatures showed increased selection for high-nitrogen and for low-fiber vegetation, demonstrating strong support for the food-quality hypothesis. By contrast, pikas that experienced warmer conditions did not reduce selection for any of the three vegetation-quality metrics, as predicted by the food-availability hypothesis. By shifting resource-selection patterns, temperature-limited animals may be able to proximately buffer some of the negative effects associated with rapidly warming environments, provided that sufficient resources remain on the landscape.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 37%
Researcher 3 16%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Other 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 63%
Environmental Science 3 16%
Unspecified 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 05 February 2019.
All research outputs
#939,320
of 12,960,324 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#146
of 3,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,598
of 382,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#6
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,960,324 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,103 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 382,087 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 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.