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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Landscape context and the biophysical response of rivers to dam removal in the United States
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0180107 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Melissa M. Foley, Francis J. Magilligan, Christian E. Torgersen, Jon J. Major, Chauncey W. Anderson, Patrick J. Connolly, Daniel Wieferich, Patrick B. Shafroth, James E. Evans, Dana Infante, Laura S. Craig |
| Abstract |
Dams have been a fundamental part of the U.S. national agenda over the past two hundred years. Recently, however, dam removal has emerged as a strategy for addressing aging, obsolete infrastructure and more than 1,100 dams have been removed since the 1970s. However, only 130 of these removals had any ecological or geomorphic assessments, and fewer than half of those included before- and after-removal (BAR) studies. In addition, this growing, but limited collection of dam-removal studies is limited to distinct landscape settings. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the landscape context of existing and removed dams and assessed the biophysical responses to dam removal for 63 BAR studies. The highest concentration of removed dams was in the Northeast and Upper Midwest, and most have been removed from 3rd and 4th order streams, in low-elevation (< 500 m) and low-slope (< 5%) watersheds that have small to moderate upstream watershed areas (10-1000 km2) with a low risk of habitat degradation. Many of the BAR-studied removals also have these characteristics, suggesting that our understanding of responses to dam removals is based on a limited range of landscape settings, which limits predictive capacity in other environmental settings. Biophysical responses to dam removal varied by landscape cluster, indicating that landscape features are likely to affect biophysical responses to dam removal. However, biophysical data were not equally distributed across variables or clusters, making it difficult to determine which landscape features have the strongest effect on dam-removal response. To address the inconsistencies across dam-removal studies, we provide suggestions for prioritizing and standardizing data collection associated with dam removal activities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 99 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 27% |
| Researcher | 18 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 20% |
| Unknown | 15 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 42 | 42% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 14% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 9 | 9% |
| Engineering | 7 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 21 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 16 March 2019.
All research outputs
#3,281,200
of 22,986,950 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#43,203
of 195,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,911
of 312,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#894
of 4,058 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,986,950 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195,961 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 312,579 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,058 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.