↓ 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
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
170 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 6 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 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
Spain 4 2%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Hungary 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Libya 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 152 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 22%
Student > Master 36 21%
Researcher 28 16%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Professor 9 5%
Other 32 19%
Unknown 10 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 111 65%
Environmental Science 31 18%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 2%
Mathematics 3 2%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 14 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 13 November 2019.
All research outputs
#3,295,661
of 14,027,165 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#40,101
of 147,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,214
of 98,893 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#560
of 2,090 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,027,165 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 147,073 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 98,893 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,090 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.