↓ Skip to main content

A Few Large Roads or Many Small Ones? How to Accommodate Growth in Vehicle Numbers to Minimise Impacts on Wildlife

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, 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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
14 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 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
A Few Large Roads or Many Small Ones? How to Accommodate Growth in Vehicle Numbers to Minimise Impacts on Wildlife
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0091093
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan R. Rhodes, Daniel Lunney, John Callaghan, Clive A. McAlpine

Abstract

Roads and vehicular traffic are among the most pervasive of threats to biodiversity because they fragmenting habitat, increasing mortality and opening up new areas for the exploitation of natural resources. However, the number of vehicles on roads is increasing rapidly and this is likely to continue into the future, putting increased pressure on wildlife populations. Consequently, a major challenge is the planning of road networks to accommodate increased numbers of vehicles, while minimising impacts on wildlife. Nonetheless, we currently have few principles for guiding decisions on road network planning to reduce impacts on wildlife in real landscapes. We addressed this issue by developing an approach for quantifying the impact on wildlife mortality of two alternative mechanisms for accommodating growth in vehicle numbers: (1) increasing the number of roads, and (2) increasing traffic volumes on existing roads. We applied this approach to a koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) population in eastern Australia and quantified the relative impact of each strategy on mortality. We show that, in most cases, accommodating growth in traffic through increases in volumes on existing roads has a lower impact than building new roads. An exception is where the existing road network has very low road density, but very high traffic volumes on each road. These findings have important implications for how we design road networks to reduce their impacts on biodiversity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Portugal 2 2%
Austria 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 117 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 18%
Student > Master 22 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Other 9 7%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 25 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 47 38%
Environmental Science 33 27%
Engineering 5 4%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 32 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 22 April 2015.
All research outputs
#1,152,696
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#15,205
of 202,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,942
of 224,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#451
of 5,443 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,084 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 224,987 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,443 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 91% of its contemporaries.