↓ Skip to main content

Uncertainty in assessing the impacts of global change with coupled dynamic species distribution and population models

Overview of attention for article published in Global Change Biology, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
224 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
Uncertainty in assessing the impacts of global change with coupled dynamic species distribution and population models
Published in
Global Change Biology, December 2012
DOI 10.1111/gcb.12090
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erin Conlisk, Alexandra D. Syphard, Janet Franklin, Lorraine Flint, Alan Flint, Helen Regan

Abstract

Concern over rapid global changes and the potential for interactions among multiple threats are prompting scientists to combine multiple modelling approaches to understand impacts on biodiversity. A relatively recent development is the combination of species distribution models, land-use change predictions, and dynamic population models to predict the relative and combined impacts of climate change, land-use change, and altered disturbance regimes on species' extinction risk. Each modelling component introduces its own source of uncertainty through different parameters and assumptions, which, when combined, can result in compounded uncertainty that can have major implications for management. Although some uncertainty analyses have been conducted separately on various model components - such as climate predictions, species distribution models, land-use change predictions, and population models - a unified sensitivity analysis comparing various sources of uncertainty in combined modelling approaches is needed to identify the most influential and problematic assumptions. We estimated the sensitivities of long-run population predictions to different ecological assumptions and parameter settings for a rare and endangered annual plant species (Acanthomintha ilicifolia, or San Diego thornmint). Uncertainty about habitat suitability predictions, due to the choice of species distribution model, contributed most to variation in predictions about long-run populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 224 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 3 1%
United States 3 1%
Italy 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Other 5 2%
Unknown 205 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 67 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 49 22%
Student > Master 26 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 12 5%
Other 31 14%
Unknown 27 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 112 50%
Environmental Science 51 23%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 12 5%
Social Sciences 3 1%
Engineering 3 1%
Other 9 4%
Unknown 34 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 November 2012.
All research outputs
#15,073,703
of 24,712,008 outputs
Outputs from Global Change Biology
#5,380
of 6,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,610
of 291,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Change Biology
#55
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,712,008 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,135 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.1. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 291,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.