↓ Skip to main content

Leaf silica concentration in Serengeti grasses increases with watering but not clipping: insights from a common garden study and literature review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Leaf silica concentration in Serengeti grasses increases with watering but not clipping: insights from a common garden study and literature review
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2014.00568
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathleen M. Quigley, T. M. Anderson

Abstract

Grasses (Poaceae) lack the complex biochemical pathways and structural defenses employed by other plant families; instead they deposit microscopic silica (SiO2) granules in their leaf blades (i.e., phytoliths) as a putative defense strategy. Silica accumulation in grasses has generally been considered an inducible defense; other research suggests silica accumulation occurs by passive diffusion and should therefore be closely coupled with whole plant transpiration. We tested the hypothesis that grasses increase leaf silica concentration in response to artificial defoliation in a common garden study in the Serengeti ecosystem of East Africa. Additionally, a watering treatment tested the alternative hypothesis that leaf silica was largely driven by plant water status. Leaf silica content of two dominant C4 Serengeti grass species, Themeda triandra and Digitaria macroblephara, was quantified after a 10-month clipping × water experiment in which defoliation occurred approximately every 2 months and supplementary water was added every 2 weeks. Themeda had greater silica content than Digitaria, and Themeda also varied in foliar silica content according to collection site. Clipping had no significant effect on leaf silica in either species and watering significantly increased silica content of the dominant tall grass species, Themeda, but not the lawn species, Digitaria. Our data, and those collected as part of a supplementary literature review, suggest that silicon induction responses are contingent upon a combination of plant identity (i.e., species, genotype, life history limitations) and environmental factors (i.e., precipitation, soil nutrients, grazing intensity). Specifically, we propose that an interaction between plant functional type and water balance plays an especially important role in determining silica uptake and accumulation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 2 3%
Israel 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 74 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 19 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 49%
Environmental Science 9 12%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Unspecified 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 19 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 October 2014.
All research outputs
#17,730,142
of 22,768,097 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#11,935
of 20,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,890
of 259,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#120
of 199 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,768,097 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,063 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 259,774 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 199 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.