↓ Skip to main content

Comparing the Ecological Stoichiometry in Green and Brown Food Webs – A Review and Meta-analysis of Freshwater Food Webs

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 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
Comparing the Ecological Stoichiometry in Green and Brown Food Webs – A Review and Meta-analysis of Freshwater Food Webs
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01184
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle A. Evans-White, Halvor M. Halvorson

Abstract

The framework of ecological stoichiometry was developed primarily within the context of "green" autotroph-based food webs. While stoichiometric principles also apply in "brown" detritus-based systems, these systems have been historically understudied and differ from green ones in several important aspects including carbon (C) quality and the nutrient [nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P)] contents of food resources for consumers. In this paper, we review work over the last decade that has advanced the application of ecological stoichiometry from green to brown food webs, focusing on freshwater ecosystems. We first review three focal areas where green and brown food webs differ: (1) bottom-up controls by light and nutrient availability, (2) stoichiometric constraints on consumer growth and nutritional regulation, and (3) patterns in consumer-driven nutrient dynamics. Our review highlights the need for further study of how light and nutrient availability affect autotroph-heterotroph interactions on detritus and the subsequent effects on consumer feeding and growth. To complement this conceptual review, we formally quantified differences in stoichiometric principles between green and brown food webs using a meta-analysis across feeding studies of freshwater benthic invertebrates. From 257 datasets collated across 46 publications and several unpublished studies, we compared effect sizes (Pearson's r) of resource N:C and P:C on growth, consumption, excretion, and egestion between herbivorous and detritivorous consumers. The meta-analysis revealed that both herbivore and detritivore growth are limited by resource N:C and P:C contents, but effect sizes only among detritivores were significantly above zero. Consumption effect sizes were negative among herbivores but positive for detritivores in the case of both N:C and P:C, indicating distinct compensatory feeding responses across resource stoichiometry gradients. Herbivore P excretion rates responded significantly positively to resource P:C, whereas detritivore N and P excretion did not respond; detritivore N and P egestion responded positively to resource N:C and P:C, respectively. Our meta-analysis highlights resource N and P contents as broadly limiting in brown and green benthic food webs, but indicates contrasting mechanisms of limitation owing to differing consumer regulation. We suggest that green and brown food webs share fundamental stoichiometric principles, while identifying specific differences toward applying ecological stoichiometry across ecosystems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 125 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 18%
Researcher 15 12%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 23 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 43 34%
Environmental Science 41 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 26 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,222,096
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#11,732
of 26,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,163
of 316,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#302
of 530 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 26,068 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 316,483 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 530 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.