↓ Skip to main content

The influence of pearl oyster farming on reef fish abundance and diversity in Ahe, French Polynesia

Overview of attention for article published in Marine Pollution Bulletin, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The influence of pearl oyster farming on reef fish abundance and diversity in Ahe, French Polynesia
Published in
Marine Pollution Bulletin, December 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.11.027
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laurent E. Cartier, Kent E. Carpenter

Abstract

Many cultured pearl farms are located in areas of the Pacific that have thriving, highly diverse fish communities but the impacts of farming on these communities are poorly understood. We studied the effects of pearl oyster farming on shore fish abundance and diversity in the lagoon of Ahe, French Polynesia by adapting roving diver census methods to the coral reef bommies of the lagoon and compared 16 sites with high pearl farming impact to others with no direct impact. Pearl farming has a slightly positive effect on reef fish abundance (N) and no significant impact on fish diversity (H) or community composition. This is important when considering the ecological sustainability of pearl farming in French Polynesia and suggests that a potential synergy between pearl farms and marine conservation should be further explored.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 1%
Chile 1 1%
Singapore 1 1%
French Polynesia 1 1%
Unknown 70 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 19%
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Unspecified 2 3%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 14 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 31%
Environmental Science 17 23%
Psychology 7 9%
Unspecified 2 3%
Chemistry 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 16 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 February 2014.
All research outputs
#14,473,828
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Marine Pollution Bulletin
#4,264
of 9,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,610
of 321,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Marine Pollution Bulletin
#37
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,588 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 321,323 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 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.