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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Pelagic protected areas: the missing dimension in ocean conservation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trends in Ecology & Evolution, March 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.tree.2009.01.011 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Edward T. Game, Hedley S. Grantham, Alistair J. Hobday, Robert L. Pressey, Amanda T. Lombard, Lynnath E. Beckley, Kristina Gjerde, Rodrigo Bustamante, Hugh P. Possingham, Anthony J. Richardson |
| Abstract |
Fewer protected areas exist in the pelagic ocean than any other ecosystem on Earth. Although there is increasing support for marine protected areas (MPAs) as a tool for pelagic conservation, there have also been numerous criticisms of the ecological, logistical and economic feasibility of place-based management in the dynamic pelagic environment. Here we argue that recent advances across conservation, oceanography and fisheries science provide the evidence, tools and information to address these criticisms and confirm MPAs as defensible and feasible instruments for pelagic conservation. Debate over the efficacy of protected areas relative to other conservation measures cannot be resolved without further implementation of MPAs in the pelagic ocean. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 929 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 10 | 1% |
| United States | 9 | <1% |
| Canada | 6 | <1% |
| Spain | 5 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | <1% |
| Australia | 4 | <1% |
| France | 3 | <1% |
| Germany | 3 | <1% |
| Norway | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 18 | 2% |
| Unknown | 864 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 211 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 165 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 154 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 98 | 11% |
| Other | 53 | 6% |
| Other | 146 | 16% |
| Unknown | 102 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 424 | 46% |
| Environmental Science | 274 | 29% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 51 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 17 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 8 | <1% |
| Other | 34 | 4% |
| Unknown | 121 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 14 June 2018.
All research outputs
#2,484,755
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Ecology & Evolution
#1,308
of 3,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,840
of 106,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Ecology & Evolution
#16
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,201 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 106,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.