Meta-analysis is extensively used to synthesize the results of free air CO2 enrichment (FACE) studies to produce an average effect size, which is then used to model likely plant response to rising [CO2]. The efficacy of meta-analysis is reliant upon the use of data that characterizes the range of responses to a given factor. Previous meta-analyses of the effect of FACE on plants have not incorporated the potential impact of reporting bias in skewing data. By replicating the methodology of these meta-analytic studies, we demonstrate that meta-analysis of FACE has likely exaggerated the effect size of elevated [CO2] on plants by 20 to 40%; having significant implications for predictions of food security and vegetation response to climate change. Incorporation of the impact of reporting bias did not affect the significance or the direction of the [CO2] effect.
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 05 July 2017.
All research outputs
#4,797,881
of 26,458,381 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#2,380
of 25,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,204
of 386,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#44
of 497 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,458,381 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 25,294 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 386,022 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 497 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 91% of its contemporaries.
