↓ Skip to main content

Benefits of Group Living Include Increased Feeding Efficiency and Lower Mass Loss during Desiccation in the Social and Inbreeding Spider Stegodyphus dumicola

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Benefits of Group Living Include Increased Feeding Efficiency and Lower Mass Loss during Desiccation in the Social and Inbreeding Spider Stegodyphus dumicola
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00018
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bram Vanthournout, Michelle Greve, Anne Bruun, Jesper Bechsgaard, Johannes Overgaard, Trine Bilde

Abstract

Group living carries a price: it inherently entails increased competition for resources and reproduction, and may also be associated with mating among relatives, which carries costs of inbreeding. Nonetheless, group living and sociality is found in many animals, and understanding the direct and indirect benefits of cooperation that override the inherent costs remains a challenge in evolutionary ecology. Individuals in groups may benefit from more efficient management of energy or water reserves, for example in the form of reduced water or heat loss from groups of animals huddling, or through reduced energy demands afforded by shared participation in tasks. We investigated the putative benefits of group living in the permanently social spider Stegodyphus dumicola by comparing the effect of group size on standard metabolic rate, lipid/protein content as a body condition measure, feeding efficiency, per capita web investment, and weight/water loss and survival during desiccation. Because energetic expenditure is temperature sensitive, some assays were performed under varying temperature conditions. We found that feeding efficiency increased with group size, and the rate of weight loss was higher in solitary individuals than in animals in groups of various sizes during desiccation. Interestingly, this was not translated into differences in survival or in standard metabolic rate. We did not detect any group size effects for other parameters, and group size effects did not co-vary with experimental temperature in a predictive manner. Both feeding efficiency and mass loss during desiccation are relevant ecological factors as the former results in lowered predator exposure time, and the latter benefits social spiders which occupy arid, hot environments.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 24 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 16%
Student > Master 9 11%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 7%
Environmental Science 4 5%
Psychology 3 4%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 23 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,148,843
of 24,189,858 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#4,718
of 14,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,185
of 405,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#63
of 146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,189,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,823 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 405,637 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 146 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 55% of its contemporaries.