↓ Skip to main content

Ecological Consequences of Clonal Integration in Plants

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
88 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
Ecological Consequences of Clonal Integration in Plants
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2016.00770
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fenghong Liu, Jian Liu, Ming Dong

Abstract

Clonal plants are widespread throughout the plant kingdom and dominate in diverse habitats. Spatiotemporal heterogeneity of environment is pervasive at multiple scales, even at scales relevant to individual plants. Clonal integration refers to resource translocation and information communication among the ramets of clonal plants. Due to clonal integration, clonal plant species possess a series of peculiar attributes: plasticity in response to local and non-local conditions, labor division with organ specialization for acquiring locally abundant resources, foraging behavior by selective placement of ramets in resource-rich microhabitats, and avoidance of intraclonal competition. Clonal integration has very profound ecological consequences for clonal plants. It allows them to efficiently cope with environmental heterogeneity, by alleviating local resource shortages, buffering environmental stresses and disturbances, influencing competitive ability, increasing invasiveness, and altering species composition and invasibility at the community level. In this paper, we present a comprehensive review of research on the ecological consequences of plant clonal integration based on a large body of literature. We also attempt to propose perspectives for future research.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 19%
Researcher 13 15%
Student > Master 9 10%
Professor 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 24 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 39%
Environmental Science 21 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 27 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 18 September 2020.
All research outputs
#4,122,531
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#2,174
of 20,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,739
of 351,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#42
of 526 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,270 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 351,542 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 526 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.