↓ Skip to main content

Managing consequences of climate‐driven species redistribution requires integration of ecology, conservation and social science

Overview of attention for article published in Biological Reviews, June 2017
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
83 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
156 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
565 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
Managing consequences of climate‐driven species redistribution requires integration of ecology, conservation and social science
Published in
Biological Reviews, June 2017
DOI 10.1111/brv.12344
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timothy C. Bonebrake, Christopher J. Brown, Johann D. Bell, Julia L. Blanchard, Alienor Chauvenet, Curtis Champion, I‐Ching Chen, Timothy D. Clark, Robert K. Colwell, Finn Danielsen, Anthony I. Dell, Jennifer M. Donelson, Birgitta Evengård, Simon Ferrier, Stewart Frusher, Raquel A. Garcia, Roger B. Griffis, Alistair J. Hobday, Marta A. Jarzyna, Emma Lee, Jonathan Lenoir, Hlif Linnetved, Victoria Y. Martin, Phillipa C. McCormack, Jan McDonald, Eve McDonald‐Madden, Nicola Mitchell, Tero Mustonen, John M. Pandolfi, Nathalie Pettorelli, Hugh Possingham, Peter Pulsifer, Mark Reynolds, Brett R. Scheffers, Cascade J. B. Sorte, Jan M. Strugnell, Mao‐Ning Tuanmu, Samantha Twiname, Adriana Vergés, Cecilia Villanueva, Erik Wapstra, Thomas Wernberg, Gretta T. Pecl

Abstract

Climate change is driving a pervasive global redistribution of the planet's species. Species redistribution poses new questions for the study of ecosystems, conservation science and human societies that require a coordinated and integrated approach. Here we review recent progress, key gaps and strategic directions in this nascent research area, emphasising emerging themes in species redistribution biology, the importance of understanding underlying drivers and the need to anticipate novel outcomes of changes in species ranges. We highlight that species redistribution has manifest implications across multiple temporal and spatial scales and from genes to ecosystems. Understanding range shifts from ecological, physiological, genetic and biogeographical perspectives is essential for informing changing paradigms in conservation science and for designing conservation strategies that incorporate changing population connectivity and advance adaptation to climate change. Species redistributions present challenges for human well-being, environmental management and sustainable development. By synthesising recent approaches, theories and tools, our review establishes an interdisciplinary foundation for the development of future research on species redistribution. Specifically, we demonstrate how ecological, conservation and social research on species redistribution can best be achieved by working across disciplinary boundaries to develop and implement solutions to climate change challenges. Future studies should therefore integrate existing and complementary scientific frameworks while incorporating social science and human-centred approaches. Finally, we emphasise that the best science will not be useful unless more scientists engage with managers, policy makers and the public to develop responsible and socially acceptable options for the global challenges arising from species redistributions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 83 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 565 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 564 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 102 18%
Researcher 101 18%
Student > Master 85 15%
Student > Bachelor 50 9%
Other 26 5%
Other 88 16%
Unknown 113 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 171 30%
Environmental Science 146 26%
Social Sciences 22 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 13 2%
Other 57 10%
Unknown 136 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 64. 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 18 October 2023.
All research outputs
#682,955
of 25,721,020 outputs
Outputs from Biological Reviews
#164
of 1,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,978
of 331,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Reviews
#4
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,721,020 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 1,586 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 331,508 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 95% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.