↓ Skip to main content

Field Margins, Foraging Distances and Their Impacts on Nesting Pollinator Success

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, October 2011
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 (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 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
Field Margins, Foraging Distances and Their Impacts on Nesting Pollinator Success
Published in
PLoS ONE, October 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0025971
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sean A. Rands, Heather M. Whitney

Abstract

The areas of wild land around the edges of agricultural fields are a vital resource for many species. These include insect pollinators, to whom field margins provide both nest sites and important resources (especially when adjacent crops are not in flower). Nesting pollinators travel relatively short distances from the nest to forage: most species of bee are known to travel less than two kilometres away. In order to ensure that these pollinators have sufficient areas of wild land within reach of their nests, agricultural landscapes need to be designed to accommodate the limited travelling distances of nesting pollinators. We used a spatially-explicit modelling approach to consider whether increasing the width of wild strips of land within the agricultural landscape will enhance the amount of wild resources available to a nesting pollinator, and if it would impact differently on pollinators with differing foraging strategies. This was done both by creating field structures with a randomised geography, and by using landscape data based upon the British agricultural landscape. These models demonstrate that enhancing field margins should lead to an increase in the availability of forage to pollinators that nest within the landscape. With the exception of species that only forage within a very short range of their nest (less than 125 m), a given amount of field margin manipulation should enhance the proportion of land available to a pollinator for foraging regardless of the distance over which it normally travels to find food. A fixed amount of field edge manipulation should therefore be equally beneficial for both longer-distance nesting foragers such as honeybees, and short-distance foragers such as solitary bees.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 4%
Spain 4 3%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Canada 2 1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Serbia 1 <1%
Libya 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Hungary 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 120 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 23%
Student > Master 28 20%
Researcher 26 19%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 6%
Other 32 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 96 69%
Environmental Science 26 19%
Unspecified 6 4%
Mathematics 3 2%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 6 4%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 20 August 2013.
All research outputs
#671,574
of 3,629,356 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#15,665
of 64,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,373
of 63,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#404
of 1,886 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 3,629,356 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 64,075 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 63,309 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,886 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.