↓ Skip to main content

The large mean body size of mammalian herbivores explains the productivity paradox during the Last Glacial Maximum

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Ecology & Evolution, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
68 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
Title
The large mean body size of mammalian herbivores explains the productivity paradox during the Last Glacial Maximum
Published in
Nature Ecology & Evolution, February 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41559-018-0481-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dan Zhu, Philippe Ciais, Jinfeng Chang, Gerhard Krinner, Shushi Peng, Nicolas Viovy, Josep Peñuelas, Sergey Zimov

Abstract

Large herbivores are a major agent in ecosystems, influencing vegetation structure, and carbon and nutrient flows. During the last glacial period, a mammoth steppe ecosystem prevailed in the unglaciated northern lands, supporting a high diversity and density of megafaunal herbivores. The apparent discrepancy between abundant megafauna and the expected low vegetation productivity under a generally harsher climate with a lower CO2concentration, termed the productivity paradox, requires large-scale quantitative analysis using process-based ecosystem models. However, most of the current global dynamic vegetation models (DGVMs) lack explicit representation of large herbivores. Here we incorporated a grazing module in a DGVM based on physiological and demographic equations for wild large grazers, taking into account feedbacks of large grazers on vegetation. The model was applied globally for present-day and the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM). The present-day results of potential grazer biomass, combined with an empirical land-use map, infer a reduction in wild grazer biomass by 79-93% owing to anthropogenic land replacement of natural grasslands. For the LGM, we find that the larger mean body size of mammalian herbivores than today is the crucial clue to explain the productivity paradox, due to a more efficient exploitation of grass production by grazers with a large body size.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 68 X users 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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 23%
Researcher 18 17%
Student > Master 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Professor 5 5%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 26 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 24%
Environmental Science 16 15%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 13 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 34 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 93. 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 01 September 2021.
All research outputs
#459,963
of 25,587,485 outputs
Outputs from Nature Ecology & Evolution
#813
of 2,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,528
of 344,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Ecology & Evolution
#49
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,587,485 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,173 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 149.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 344,381 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.