↓ Skip to main content

Positive Interactions Between Irrawaddy Dolphins and Artisanal Fishers in the Chilika Lagoon of Eastern India are Driven by Ecology, Socioeconomics, and Culture

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio, September 2013
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 Mendeley
Title
Positive Interactions Between Irrawaddy Dolphins and Artisanal Fishers in the Chilika Lagoon of Eastern India are Driven by Ecology, Socioeconomics, and Culture
Published in
Ambio, September 2013
DOI 10.1007/s13280-013-0440-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Coralie D’Lima, Helene Marsh, Mark Hamann, Anindya Sinha, Rohan Arthur

Abstract

In human-dominated landscapes, interactions and perceptions towards wildlife are influenced by multidimensional drivers. Understanding these drivers could prove useful for wildlife conservation. We surveyed the attitudes and perceptions of fishers towards threatened Irrawaddy dolphins (Orcaella brevirostris) at Chilika Lagoon India. To validate the drivers of fisher perceptions, we : (1) observed dolphin foraging behavior at stake nets, and (2) compared catch per unit effort (CPUE) and catch income of fishers from stake nets in the presence and absence of foraging dolphins. We found that fishers were mostly positive towards dolphins, believing that dolphins augmented their fish catch and using culture to express their perceptions. Foraging dolphins were observed spending half their time at stake nets and were associated with significantly higher catch income and CPUE of mullet (Liza sp.), a locally preferred food fish species. Wildlife conservation efforts should use the multidimensional drivers of human-wildlife interactions to involve local stakeholders in management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 3 2%
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 137 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 18%
Student > Master 19 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 5%
Other 27 19%
Unknown 24 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 47 32%
Environmental Science 34 23%
Social Sciences 10 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 29 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 01 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,820,187
of 23,221,875 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#507
of 1,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,414
of 198,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,221,875 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,647 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 198,611 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 69% of its contemporaries.