↓ Skip to main content

Monitoring Plant Phenology Using Digital Repeat Photography

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, February 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
127 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
283 Mendeley
Title
Monitoring Plant Phenology Using Digital Repeat Photography
Published in
Environmental Management, February 2008
DOI 10.1007/s00267-008-9086-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael A. Crimmins, Theresa M. Crimmins

Abstract

Repeated observations of plant phenology have been shown to be important indicators of global change. However, capturing the exact date of key events requires daily observations during the growing season, making phenologic observations relatively labor intensive and costly to collect. One alternative to daily observations for capturing the dates of key phenologic events is repeat photography. In this study, we explored the utility of repeat digital photography for monitoring phenologic events in plants. We provide an illustration of this approach and its utility by placing observations made using repeat digital imagery in context with local meteorologic and edaphic variables. We found that repeat photography provides a reliable, consistent measurement of phenophase. In addition, digital photography offers advantages in that it can be mathematically manipulated to detect and enhance patterns; it can classify objects; and digital photographs can be archived for future analysis. In this study, an estimate of greenness and counts of individual flowers were extracted by way of mathematic algorithms from the photo time series. These metrics were interpreted using meteorologic measurements collected at the study site. We conclude that repeat photography, coupled with site-specific meteorologic measurements, could greatly enhance our understanding environmental triggers of phenologic events. In addition, the methods described could easily be adopted by citizen scientists and the general public as well as professionals in the field.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 283 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
Germany 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 271 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 20%
Researcher 46 16%
Student > Master 42 15%
Student > Bachelor 40 14%
Other 14 5%
Other 44 16%
Unknown 40 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 78 28%
Environmental Science 74 26%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 27 10%
Computer Science 8 3%
Engineering 6 2%
Other 28 10%
Unknown 62 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 22 January 2020.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#1,476
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,859
of 96,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#11
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 96,387 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.