↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of Online Information Sources on Alien Species in Europe: The Need of Harmonization and Integration

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of Online Information Sources on Alien Species in Europe: The Need of Harmonization and Integration
Published in
Environmental Management, April 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00267-013-0042-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francesca Gatto, Stelios Katsanevakis, Jochen Vandekerkhove, Argyro Zenetos, Ana Cristina Cardoso

Abstract

Europe is severely affected by alien invasions, which impact biodiversity, ecosystem services, economy, and human health. A large number of national, regional, and global online databases provide information on the distribution, pathways of introduction, and impacts of alien species. The sufficiency and efficiency of the current online information systems to assist the European policy on alien species was investigated by a comparative analysis of occurrence data across 43 online databases. Large differences among databases were found which are partially explained by variations in their taxonomical, environmental, and geographical scopes but also by the variable efforts for continuous updates and by inconsistencies on the definition of "alien" or "invasive" species. No single database covered all European environments, countries, and taxonomic groups. In many European countries national databases do not exist, which greatly affects the quality of reported information. To be operational and useful to scientists, managers, and policy makers, online information systems need to be regularly updated through continuous monitoring on a country or regional level. We propose the creation of a network of online interoperable web services through which information in distributed resources can be accessed, aggregated and then used for reporting and further analysis at different geographical and political scales, as an efficient approach to increase the accessibility of information. Harmonization, standardization, conformity on international standards for nomenclature, and agreement on common definitions of alien and invasive species are among the necessary prerequisites.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
Greece 1 2%
Unknown 59 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 27%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 13 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 28%
Environmental Science 12 19%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 17 27%
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 05 June 2013.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#1,476
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,033
of 207,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#14
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 207,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.