↓ Skip to main content

Didymosphenia geminata in the Upper Esopus Creek: Current Status, Variability, and Controlling Factors

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
Didymosphenia geminata in the Upper Esopus Creek: Current Status, Variability, and Controlling Factors
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0130558
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scott Daniel George, Barry Paul Baldigo

Abstract

In May of 2009, the bloom-forming diatom Didymosphenia geminata was first identified in the Upper Esopus Creek, a key tributary to the New York City water-supply and a popular recreational stream. The Upper Esopus receives supplemental flows from the Shandaken Portal, an underground aqueduct delivering waters from a nearby basin. The presence of D. geminata is a concern for the local economy, water supply, and aquatic ecosystem because nuisance blooms have been linked to degraded stream condition in other regions. Here we ascertain the extent and severity of the D. geminata invasion, determine the impact of supplemental flows from the Portal on D. geminata, and identify potential factors that may limit D. geminata in the watershed. Stream temperature, discharge, and water quality were characterized at select sites and periphyton samples were collected five times at 6 to 20 study sites between 2009 and 2010 to assess standing crop, diatom community structure, and density of D. geminata and all diatoms. Density of D. geminata ranged from 0-12 cells cm-2 at tributary sites, 0-781 cells cm-2 at sites upstream of the Portal, and 0-2,574 cells cm-2 at sites downstream of the Portal. Survey period and Portal (upstream or downstream) each significantly affected D. geminata cell density. In general, D. geminata was most abundant during the November 2009 and June 2010 surveys and at sites immediately downstream of the Portal. We found that D. geminata did not reach nuisance levels or strongly affect the periphyton community. Similarly, companion studies showed that local macroinvertebrate and fish communities were generally unaffected. A number of abiotic factors including variable flows and moderate levels of phosphorous and suspended sediment may limit blooms of D. geminata in this watershed.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 5%
Germany 1 5%
Unknown 17 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 21%
Researcher 3 16%
Other 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 4 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 47%
Environmental Science 3 16%
Chemistry 1 5%
Materials Science 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 April 2020.
All research outputs
#7,492,850
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#89,366
of 195,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,918
of 262,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,626
of 6,549 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195,252 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 262,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,549 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 56% of its contemporaries.