↓ Skip to main content

History of Tree Growth Declines Recorded in Old Trees at Two Sacred Sites in Northern China

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
History of Tree Growth Declines Recorded in Old Trees at Two Sacred Sites in Northern China
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2017.01779
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yan Li, Qi-Bin Zhang

Abstract

Old forests are an important component in sacred sites, yet they are at risk of growth decline from ongoing global warming and increased human activities. Growth decline, characterized by chronic loss of tree vigor, is not a recent phenomenon. Knowledge of past occurrence of declines is useful for preparing conservation plans because it helps understand if present day forests are outside the natural range of variation in tree health. We report a dendroecological study of growth decline events in the past two centuries at two sacred sites, Hengshan and Wutaishan, in Shanxi province of northern China. Tree rings collected at both sites show distinct periods of declining growth evident as narrow rings. These occurred in the 1830s in both sites, in the 1920s in Wutaishan and in the 2000s in Hengshan. By comparing the pattern of grow declines at the two sites, we hypothesize that resistance of tree growth to external disturbances is forest size dependent, and increased human activity might be a factor additional to climatic droughts in causing the recent strong growth decline at Hengshan Park. Despite these past declines, the forests at both sites have high resilience to disturbances as evidenced by the ability of trees to recover their growth rates to levels comparable to the pre-decline period. Managers should consider reducing fragmentation and restoring natural habitat of old forests, especially in areas on dry sites.

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 16%
Researcher 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 10 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 3 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 13 52%
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 12 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,578,649
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#13,977
of 20,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,395
of 330,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#341
of 473 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,507 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 330,780 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 473 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.