↓ Skip to main content

Hyperdominance in Amazonian forest carbon cycling

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, April 2015
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
15 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
94 tweeters
facebook
11 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
122 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
612 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Hyperdominance in Amazonian forest carbon cycling
Published in
Nature Communications, April 2015
DOI 10.1038/ncomms7857
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sophie Fauset, Michelle O. Johnson, Manuel Gloor, Timothy R. Baker, Abel Monteagudo M., Roel J.W. Brienen, Ted R. Feldpausch, Gabriela Lopez-Gonzalez, Yadvinder Malhi, Hans ter Steege, Nigel C.A. Pitman, Christopher Baraloto, Julien Engel, Pascal Pétronelli, Ana Andrade, José Luís C. Camargo, Susan G.W. Laurance, William F. Laurance, Jerôme Chave, Elodie Allie, Percy Núñez Vargas, John W. Terborgh, Kalle Ruokolainen, Marcos Silveira, Gerardo A. Aymard C., Luzmila Arroyo, Damien Bonal, Hirma Ramirez-Angulo, Alejandro Araujo-Murakami, David Neill, Bruno Hérault, Aurélie Dourdain, Armando Torres-Lezama, Beatriz S. Marimon, Rafael P. Salomão, James A. Comiskey, Maxime Réjou-Méchain, Marisol Toledo, Juan Carlos Licona, Alfredo Alarcón, Adriana Prieto, Agustín Rudas, Peter J. van der Meer, Timothy J. Killeen, Ben-Hur Marimon Junior, Lourens Poorter, Rene G.A. Boot, Basil Stergios, Emilio Vilanova Torre, Flávia R.C. Costa, Carolina Levis, Juliana Schietti, Priscila Souza, Nikée Groot, Eric Arets, Victor Chama Moscoso, Wendeson Castro, Euridice N. Honorio Coronado, Marielos Peña-Claros, Clement Stahl, Jorcely Barroso, Joey Talbot, Ima Célia Guimarães Vieira, Geertje van der Heijden, Raquel Thomas, Vincent A. Vos, Everton C. Almeida, Esteban Álvarez Davila, Luiz E.O.C. Aragão, Terry L. Erwin, Paulo S. Morandi, Edmar Almeida de Oliveira, Marco B.X. Valadão, Roderick J. Zagt, Peter van der Hout, Patricia Alvarez Loayza, John J. Pipoly, Ophelia Wang, Miguel Alexiades, Carlos E. Cerón, Isau Huamantupa-Chuquimaco, Anthony Di Fiore, Julie Peacock, Nadir C. Pallqui Camacho, Ricardo K. Umetsu, Plínio Barbosa de Camargo, Robyn J. Burnham, Rafael Herrera, Carlos A. Quesada, Juliana Stropp, Simone A. Vieira, Marc Steininger, Carlos Reynel Rodríguez, Zorayda Restrepo, Adriane Esquivel Muelbert, Simon L. Lewis, Georgia C. Pickavance, Oliver L. Phillips

Abstract

While Amazonian forests are extraordinarily diverse, the abundance of trees is skewed strongly towards relatively few 'hyperdominant' species. In addition to their diversity, Amazonian trees are a key component of the global carbon cycle, assimilating and storing more carbon than any other ecosystem on Earth. Here we ask, using a unique data set of 530 forest plots, if the functions of storing and producing woody carbon are concentrated in a small number of tree species, whether the most abundant species also dominate carbon cycling, and whether dominant species are characterized by specific functional traits. We find that dominance of forest function is even more concentrated in a few species than is dominance of tree abundance, with only ≈1% of Amazon tree species responsible for 50% of carbon storage and productivity. Although those species that contribute most to biomass and productivity are often abundant, species maximum size is also influential, while the identity and ranking of dominant species varies by function and by region.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 94 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 612 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 10 2%
United States 3 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Thailand 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 584 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 114 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 106 17%
Student > Master 98 16%
Student > Bachelor 54 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 36 6%
Other 127 21%
Unknown 77 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 236 39%
Environmental Science 196 32%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 34 6%
Social Sciences 7 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 1%
Other 29 5%
Unknown 103 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 209. 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 25 August 2019.
All research outputs
#86,803
of 15,931,664 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#1,199
of 30,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,444
of 232,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#18
of 665 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,931,664 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,563 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 49.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 232,272 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 665 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 97% of its contemporaries.