↓ Skip to main content

The Irony of Iron – Biogenic Iron Oxides as an Iron Source to the Ocean

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2016
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 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
The Irony of Iron – Biogenic Iron Oxides as an Iron Source to the Ocean
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01502
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Emerson

Abstract

Primary productivity in at least a third of the sunlit open ocean is thought to be iron-limited. Primary sources of dissolved iron (dFe) to the ocean are hydrothermal venting, flux from the sediments along continental margins, and airborne dust. This article provides a general review of sources of hydrothermal and sedimentary iron to the ocean, and speculates upon the role that iron-cycling microbes play in controlling iron dynamics from these sources. Special attention is paid to iron-oxidizing bacteria (FeOB) that live by oxidizing iron and producing biogenic iron oxides as waste products. The presence and ubiquity of FeOB both at hydrothermal systems and in sediments is only beginning to be appreciated. The biogenic oxides they produce have unique properties that could contribute significantly to the dynamics of dFe in the ocean. Changes in the physical and chemical characteristics of the ocean due to climate change and ocean acidification will undoubtedly impact the microbial iron cycle. A better understanding of the contemporary role of microbes in the iron cycle will help in predicting how these changes could ultimately influence marine primary productivity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 4%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 108 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 23%
Researcher 22 19%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Student > Master 13 11%
Other 7 6%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 16 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 28 25%
Environmental Science 21 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 9%
Chemistry 4 4%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 23 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 January 2022.
All research outputs
#3,160,321
of 24,787,209 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#2,783
of 28,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,635
of 404,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#59
of 461 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,787,209 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 28,253 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 404,709 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 461 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.