↓ Skip to main content

Factors affecting branch failures in open-grown trees during a snowstorm in Massachusetts, USA

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Factors affecting branch failures in open-grown trees during a snowstorm in Massachusetts, USA
Published in
SpringerPlus, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/2193-1801-3-720
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian Kane, John T Finn

Abstract

In October 2011, a snowstorm in the northeastern USA caused many branch failures of many tree species commonly planted in urbanized settings. Immediately following the storm, we assessed 1,764 trees for possible snow-induced damage and factors affecting it on the campus of the University of Massachusetts in Amherst, MA, USA. Nearly all failures were of branches, most of which were not defective. We used logistic regression to assess whether the probability of branch failure differed among species, diameter at breast height (DBH) and the presence of a defect or leaves increased for different species. We also measured branch morphology of (i) branches that did and did not fail for one angiosperm species and (ii) all branches on a sub-sample (stratified by DBH) of three individuals of seven other angiosperm species. Probability of branch failure differed among species. It also increased with greater DBH in eight of ten species studied, decreased when defects were present in four of ten species, and increased in one species when leaves were present. The relationship between branch failure and DBH appeared to be due to the correlation between DBH and branch morphology, which was mostly similar among species. As DBH increased, so did the mean diameter and length of primary branches, and the cumulative diameter of secondary branches. In contrast, branch slenderness decreased with increasing DBH. Combined, these factors presumably expedited the accumulation of snow on branches due to greater surface area and less flexibility. This explained why most failed branches were not defective. Since the frequency of intense storms is predicted to increase with global climate change, urban foresters should consider the timing of leaf senescence when selecting deciduous trees, to reduce the likelihood of failure of open-grown, deciduous trees in urbanized areas.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Student > Master 4 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 31%
Environmental Science 5 19%
Engineering 2 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 8 31%
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 2014.
All research outputs
#18,386,678
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,261
of 1,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#261,587
of 361,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#61
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 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 1,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 361,216 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.