↓ Skip to main content

Meeting the Aichi targets: Pushing for zero extinction conservation

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
Title
Meeting the Aichi targets: Pushing for zero extinction conservation
Published in
Ambio, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13280-016-0892-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephan M. Funk, Dalia Conde, John Lamoreux, Julia E. Fa

Abstract

Effective protection of the ~19 000 IUCN-listed threatened species has never been more pressing. Ensuring the survival of the most vulnerable and irreplaceable taxa and places, such as those identified by the Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) species and their associated sites (AZEs&s), is an excellent opportunity to achieve the Aichi 2020 Targets T11 (protected areas) and T12 (preventing species extinctions). AZE taxa have small, single-site populations that are especially vulnerable to human-induced extinctions, particularly for the many amphibians. We show that AZEs&s can be protected feasibly and cost-effectively, but action is urgent. We argue that the Alliance, whose initial main aim was to identify AZEs&s, must be followed up by a second-generation initiative that directs and co-ordinates AZE conservation activities on the ground. The prominent role of zoos, conservation NGOs, and governmental institutions provides a combination of all-encompassing knowhow that can, if properly steered, maximize the long-term survival of AZEs&s.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 90 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 18%
Student > Master 15 16%
Researcher 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 14%
Professor 6 7%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 11 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 32%
Environmental Science 27 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Computer Science 2 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 2%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 15 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 03 March 2017.
All research outputs
#5,434,088
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#820
of 1,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,804
of 420,224 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#26
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,631 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. 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 420,224 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.