↓ Skip to main content

Herbaceous plant species invading natural areas tend to have stronger adaptive root foraging than other naturalized species

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Herbaceous plant species invading natural areas tend to have stronger adaptive root foraging than other naturalized species
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, April 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2015.00273
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lidewij H. Keser, Eric J. W. Visser, Wayne Dawson, Yao-Bin Song, Fei-Hai Yu, Markus Fischer, Ming Dong, Mark van Kleunen

Abstract

Although plastic root-foraging responses are thought to be adaptive, as they may optimize nutrient capture of plants, this has rarely been tested. We investigated whether nutrient-foraging responses are adaptive, and whether they pre-adapt alien species to become natural-area invaders. We grew 12 pairs of congeneric species (i.e., 24 species) native to Europe in heterogeneous and homogeneous nutrient environments, and compared their foraging responses and performance. One species in each pair is a USA natural-area invader, and the other one is not. Within species, individuals with strong foraging responses, measured as plasticity in root diameter and specific root length, had a higher biomass. Among species, the ones with strong foraging responses, measured as plasticity in root length and root biomass, had a higher biomass. Our results therefore suggest that root foraging is an adaptive trait. Invasive species showed significantly stronger root-foraging responses than non-invasive species when measured as root diameter. Biomass accumulation was decreased in the heterogeneous vs. the homogeneous environment. In aboveground, but not belowground and total biomass, this decrease was smaller in invasive than in non-invasive species. Our results show that strong plastic root-foraging responses are adaptive, and suggest that it might aid in pre-adapting species to becoming natural-area invaders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 22%
Student > Master 6 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 10%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 41%
Environmental Science 10 24%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Unknown 12 29%
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 27 April 2015.
All research outputs
#20,269,439
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#15,975
of 20,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,582
of 265,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#228
of 281 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,080 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 265,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 281 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.