The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Ant-Pollinator Conflict Results in Pollinator Deterrence but no Nectar Trade-Offs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2018.01093 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nora Villamil, Karina Boege, Graham N. Stone |
| Abstract |
Direct and indirect negative interactions between ant guards and pollinators on ant-plants are expected for two reasons. First, aggressive ants may deter pollinators directly. Second, pollinators benefit from plant investment in reproduction whilst ants benefit from plant investment in indirect defense, and resource allocation trade-offs between these functions could lead to indirect conflict. We explored the potential for ant-pollinator conflict in a Mexican myrmecophile, Turnera velutina, which rewards ants with extrafloral nectar and pollinators with floral nectar. We characterized the daily timing of ant and pollinator activity on the plant and used experiments to test for direct and indirect conflict between these two groups of mutualists. We tested for direct conflict by quantifying pollinator responses to flowers containing dead specimens of aggressive ant species, relative to unoccupied control flowers. We assessed indirect conflict by testing for the existence of a trade-off in sugar allocation between ant and pollinator rewards, evidenced by an increase in floral nectar secretion when extrafloral nectar secretion was prevented. Secretion of floral and extrafloral nectar, activity of ants and pollinators, and pollen deposition all overlapped in daily time and peaked within the first 2 h after flowers opened. We found evidence of direct conflict, in that presence of ants inside the flowers altered pollinator behavior and reduced visit duration, although visit frequency was unchanged. We found no evidence for indirect conflict, with no significant difference in the volume or sugar content of floral nectar between control plants and those in which extrafloral nectar secretion was prevented. The presence of ants in flowers alters pollinator behavior in ways that are likely to affect pollination dynamics, though there is no apparent trade-off between plant investment in nectar rewards for pollinators and ant guards. Further studies are required to quantify the effect of the natural abundance of ants in flowers on pollinator behavior, and any associated impacts on plant reproductive success. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 2 | 25% |
| Mexico | 1 | 13% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 88% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 17 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 30 | 49% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 3% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 21 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 13 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,879,973
of 24,311,255 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#1,328
of 22,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,810
of 334,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#47
of 471 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,311,255 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,841 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 334,807 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 471 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 90% of its contemporaries.