↓ Skip to main content

Plastic ingestion by Flesh-footed Shearwaters (Puffinus carneipes): Implications for fledgling body condition and the accumulation of plastic-derived chemicals

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Pollution, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#19 of 13,432)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
60 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
21 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
216 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
425 Mendeley
Title
Plastic ingestion by Flesh-footed Shearwaters (Puffinus carneipes): Implications for fledgling body condition and the accumulation of plastic-derived chemicals
Published in
Environmental Pollution, January 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.envpol.2013.12.020
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer L. Lavers, Alexander L. Bond, Ian Hutton

Abstract

To provide much needed quantitative data on the lethal and sublethal effects of plastic pollution on marine wildlife, we sampled breast feathers and stomach contents from Flesh-footed Shearwater (Puffinus carneipes) fledglings in eastern Australia. Birds with high levels of ingested plastic exhibited reduced body condition and increased contaminant load (p < 0.05). More than 60% of fledglings exceed international targets for plastic ingestion by seabirds, with 16% of fledglings failing these targets after a single feeding (range: 0.13-3.21 g of plastic/feeding). As top predators, seabirds are considered sentinels of the marine environment. The amount of plastic ingested and corresponding damage to Flesh-footed Shearwater fledglings is the highest reported for any marine vertebrate, suggesting the condition of the Australian marine environment is poor. These findings help explain the ongoing decline of this species and are worrying in light of increasing levels of plastic pollution in our oceans.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 425 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 414 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 81 19%
Student > Master 77 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 56 13%
Researcher 51 12%
Other 19 4%
Other 42 10%
Unknown 99 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 116 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 115 27%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 17 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 3%
Engineering 10 2%
Other 32 8%
Unknown 122 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 497. 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 07 July 2023.
All research outputs
#52,165
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Pollution
#19
of 13,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#374
of 322,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Pollution
#1
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,432 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 322,862 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 98% of its contemporaries.