| Title |
Evaluation of eDNA for groundwater invertebrate detection and monitoring: a case study with endangered Stygobromus (Amphipoda: Crangonyctidae)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Conservation Genetics Resources, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12686-017-0785-2 |
| Authors |
Matthew L. Niemiller, Megan L. Porter, Jenna Keany, Heather Gilbert, Daniel W. Fong, David C. Culver, Christopher S. Hobson, K. Denise Kendall, Mark A. Davis, Steven J. Taylor |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | 24% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 5% |
| Chile | 2 | 5% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 3% |
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Slovenia | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 20 | 54% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 18 | 49% |
| Scientists | 16 | 43% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 102 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 19% |
| Researcher | 16 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 29 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 34 | 33% |
| Environmental Science | 19 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 12% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 67. 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 06 July 2017.
All research outputs
#649,167
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Genetics Resources
#2
of 372 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,053
of 320,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Genetics Resources
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 372 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 320,985 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 13 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 92% of its contemporaries.