↓ Skip to main content

Dangerous jellyfish blooms are predictable

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of The Royal Society Interface, July 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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Dangerous jellyfish blooms are predictable
Published in
Journal of The Royal Society Interface, July 2014
DOI 10.1098/rsif.2013.1168
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa-ann Gershwin, Scott A. Condie, Jim V. Mansbridge, Anthony J. Richardson

Abstract

The potentially fatal Irukandji syndrome is relatively common in tropical waters throughout the world. It is caused by the sting of the Irukandji jellyfish, a family of box jellyfish that are almost impossible to detect in the water owing to their small size and transparency. Using collated medical records of stings and local weather conditions, we show that the presence of Irukandji blooms in coastal waters can be forecast on the basis of wind conditions. On the Great Barrier Reef, blooms largely coincide with relaxation of the prevailing southeasterly trade winds, with average conditions corresponding to near zero alongshore wind on the day prior to the sting. These conditions are consistent with hypotheses long held by local communities and provide a basis for designing management interventions that have the potential to eliminate the majority of stings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
France 1 1%
Malaysia 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Unknown 80 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 17%
Researcher 13 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 15%
Student > Master 9 10%
Professor 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 15 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 47%
Environmental Science 17 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 3%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 15 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. 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 27 May 2015.
All research outputs
#863,069
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from Journal of The Royal Society Interface
#451
of 3,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,140
of 227,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of The Royal Society Interface
#9
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 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 3,051 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 227,469 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 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.