↓ Skip to main content

Incorporating threat in hotspots and coldspots of biodiversity and ecosystem services

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
Title
Incorporating threat in hotspots and coldspots of biodiversity and ecosystem services
Published in
Ambio, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13280-017-0922-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthias Schröter, Roland Kraemer, Silvia Ceauşu, Graciela M. Rusch

Abstract

Spatial prioritization could help target conservation actions directed to maintain both biodiversity and ecosystem services. We delineate hotspots and coldspots of two biodiversity conservation features and five regulating and cultural services by incorporating an indicator of 'threat', i.e. timber harvest profitability for forest areas in Telemark (Norway). We found hotspots, where high values of biodiversity, ecosystem services and threat coincide, ranging from 0.1 to 7.1% of the area, depending on varying threshold levels. Targeting of these areas for conservation follows reactive conservation approaches. In coldspots, high biodiversity and ecosystem service values coincide with low levels of threat, and cover 0.1-3.4% of the forest area. These areas might serve proactive conservation approaches at lower opportunity cost (foregone timber harvest profits). We conclude that a combination of indicators of biodiversity, ecosystem services and potential threat is an appropriate approach for spatial prioritization of proactive and reactive conservation strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 1%
Unknown 93 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 23 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 27 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 24%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 34 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 15 May 2017.
All research outputs
#6,188,085
of 23,182,015 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#896
of 1,644 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,913
of 309,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,182,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,644 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 309,905 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.