Title |
Plant functional types and traits as biodiversity indicators for tropical forests: two biogeographically separated case studies including birds, mammals and termites
|
---|---|
Published in |
Biodiversity and Conservation, July 2013
|
DOI | 10.1007/s10531-013-0517-1 |
Authors |
Andrew N. Gillison, David E. Bignell, Kenneth R. W. Brewer, Erick C. M. Fernandes, David T. Jones, Douglas Sheil, Peter H. May, Allan D. Watt, Reginaldo Constantino, Eduardo G. Couto, Kurniatun Hairiah, Paul Jepson, Agus P. Kartono, Ibnu Maryanto, Germano G. Neto, Meine van Noordwijk, Elton A. Silveira, Francis-Xavier Susilo, Stephen A. Vosti, Paulo C. Nunes |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 237 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Brazil | 6 | 3% |
Colombia | 2 | <1% |
Japan | 2 | <1% |
Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Ecuador | 1 | <1% |
Canada | 1 | <1% |
United States | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 222 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 54 | 23% |
Student > Master | 38 | 16% |
Researcher | 37 | 16% |
Professor | 20 | 8% |
Lecturer | 12 | 5% |
Other | 50 | 21% |
Unknown | 26 | 11% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 113 | 48% |
Environmental Science | 64 | 27% |
Earth and Planetary Sciences | 7 | 3% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 2% |
Computer Science | 3 | 1% |
Other | 10 | 4% |
Unknown | 35 | 15% |
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 26 July 2013.
All research outputs
#19,382,126
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Biodiversity and Conservation
#2,066
of 2,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,344
of 197,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biodiversity and Conservation
#20
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,319 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 197,686 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.