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 |
Native Bee Diversity and Pollen Foraging Specificity in Cultivated Highbush Blueberry (Ericaceae:Vaccinium corymbosum) in Rhode Island
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Entomology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1093/ee/nvw094 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zachary Scott, Howard S. Ginsberg, Steven R. Alm |
| Abstract |
We identified 41 species of native bees from a total of 1,083 specimens collected at cultivated highbush blueberry plantings throughout Rhode Island in 2014 and 2015. Andrena spp., Bombus spp., and Xylocopa virginica (L.) were collected most often. Bombus griseocollis (DeGeer), B. impatiens Cresson, B. bimaculatus Cresson, B. perplexus Cresson, and Andrena vicina Smith collected the largest mean numbers of blueberry pollen tetrads. The largest mean percent blueberry pollen loads were carried by the miner bees Andrena bradleyi Viereck (91%), A. carolina Viereck (90%), and Colletes validus Cresson (87%). The largest mean total pollen grain loads were carried by B. griseocollis (549,844), B. impatiens (389,558), X. virginica (233,500), and B. bimaculatus (193,132). Xylocopa virginica was the fourth and fifth most commonly collected bee species in 2014 and 2015, respectively. They exhibit nectar robbing and females carried relatively low blueberry pollen loads (mean 33%). Overall, we found 10 species of bees to be the primary pollinators of blueberries in Rhode Island. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 42 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 27% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 4% |
| Professor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 20% |
| Unknown | 11 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 42% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 16% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 15 | 33% |
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 24 October 2016.
All research outputs
#18,478,448
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Entomology
#1,495
of 2,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,668
of 319,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Entomology
#9
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 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 2,045 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 319,603 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 58% of its contemporaries.