↓ Skip to main content

Integrating occurrence and detectability patterns based on interview data: a case study for threatened mammals in Equatorial Guinea

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 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
Integrating occurrence and detectability patterns based on interview data: a case study for threatened mammals in Equatorial Guinea
Published in
Scientific Reports, September 2016
DOI 10.1038/srep33838
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chele Martínez-Martí, María V. Jiménez-Franco, J. Andrew Royle, José A. Palazón, José F. Calvo

Abstract

Occurrence models that account for imperfect detection of species are increasingly used for estimating geographical range, for determining species-landscape relations and to prioritize conservation actions worldwide. In 2010, we conducted a large-scale survey in Río Muni, the mainland territory of Equatorial Guinea, which aimed to estimate the probabilities of occurrence and detection of threatened mammals based on environmental covariates, and to identify priority areas for conservation. Interviews with hunters were designed to record presence/absence data of seven species (golden cat, leopard, forest elephant, forest buffalo, western gorilla, chimpanzee and mandrill) in 225 sites throughout the region. We fitted single season occupancy models and recently developed models which also include false positive errors (i.e. species detected in places where it actually does not occur), which should provide more accurate estimates for most species, which are susceptible to mis-identification. Golden cat and leopard had the lowest occurrence rates in the region, whereas primates had the highest rates. All species, except gorilla, were affected negatively by human settlements. The southern half of Río Muni showed the highest occurrence of the species studied, and conservation strategies for ensuring the persistence of threatened mammals should be focused on this area.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 79 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Master 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Other 17 21%
Unknown 9 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 31 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Unspecified 1 1%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 13 16%
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 01 October 2016.
All research outputs
#18,833,474
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#92,844
of 130,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,102
of 326,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#2,492
of 3,481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 130,275 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 326,856 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,481 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.