↓ Skip to main content

Large‐scale movements in European badgers: has the tail of the movement kernel been underestimated?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Animal Ecology, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
48 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
161 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
Large‐scale movements in European badgers: has the tail of the movement kernel been underestimated?
Published in
Journal of Animal Ecology, March 2014
DOI 10.1111/1365-2656.12197
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew W Byrne, John L Quinn, James J O'Keeffe, Stuart Green, D Paddy Sleeman, S Wayne Martin, John Davenport

Abstract

Characterizing patterns of animal movement is a major aim in population ecology, and yet doing so at an appropriate spatial scale remains a major challenge. Estimating the frequency and distances of movements is of particular importance when species are implicated in the transmission of zoonotic diseases. European badgers (Meles meles) are classically viewed as exhibiting limited dispersal, and yet their movements bring them into conflict with farmers due to their potential to spread bovine tuberculosis in parts of their range. Considerable uncertainty surrounds the movement potential of badgers, and this may be related to the spatial scale of previous empirical studies. We conducted a large-scale mark-recapture study (755 km(2) ; 2008-2012; 1935 capture events; 963 badgers) to investigate movement patterns in badgers, and undertook a comparative meta-analysis using published data from 15 European populations. The dispersal movement (>1 km) kernel followed an inverse power-law function, with a substantial 'tail' indicating the occurrence of rare long-distance dispersal attempts during the study period. The mean recorded distance from this distribution was 2·6 km, the 95 percentile was 7·3 km and the longest recorded was 22·1 km. Dispersal frequency distributions were significantly different between genders; males dispersed more frequently than females, but females made proportionally more long-distance dispersal attempts than males. We used a subsampling approach to demonstrate that the appropriate minimum spatial scale to characterize badger movements in our study population was 80 km(2) , substantially larger than many previous badger studies. Furthermore, the meta-analysis indicated a significant association between maximum movement distance and study area size, while controlling for population density. Maximum long-distance movements were often only recorded by chance beyond the boundaries of study areas. These findings suggest that the tail of the badger movement distribution is currently underestimated. The implications of this for understanding the spatial ecology of badger populations and for the design of disease intervention strategies are potentially significant.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 48 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 161 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 151 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 42 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 25%
Student > Master 19 12%
Other 10 6%
Student > Bachelor 10 6%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 20 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 85 53%
Environmental Science 17 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 5%
Engineering 7 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 4%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 22 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. 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 August 2022.
All research outputs
#699,314
of 25,399,318 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Animal Ecology
#198
of 3,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,472
of 235,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Animal Ecology
#2
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,399,318 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,231 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 235,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.