↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of recent trends in Australian pome fruit spring phenology

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Biometeorology, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of recent trends in Australian pome fruit spring phenology
Published in
International Journal of Biometeorology, July 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00484-012-0567-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca Darbyshire, Leanne Webb, Ian Goodwin, E. W. R. Barlow

Abstract

Temporal and temperature driven analyses were conducted for eight spring phenology datasets from three Australian pome fruit growing regions ranging from 24 to 43 years in length. This, the first such analysis for Australia, indicated significant temporal change in phenophase timing for only one of the datasets. To determine relationships to temperature, a sequential chill and growth method as well as mean springtime temperatures were used to estimate phenophase timing. Expected advancement of phenophase ranged from 4.1 to 7.7 days per degree Celsius increase in temperature. The sequential chill and growth approach proved superior, with coefficients of determination between 0.49 and 0.85, indicating the inclusion of chill conditions are important for spring phenology modelling. Compared to similar phenological research in the Northern Hemisphere, the changes in response variables were often shallower in Australia, although significance of observed hemispheric differences were not found.

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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 52 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 36%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 21%
Professor 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 51%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 9%
Environmental Science 5 9%
Chemical Engineering 3 6%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 9 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 September 2013.
All research outputs
#3,317,731
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Biometeorology
#358
of 1,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,240
of 166,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Biometeorology
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,321 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 166,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.