↓ Skip to main content

Modelling land cover change in the Brazilian Amazon: temporal changes in drivers and calibration issues

Overview of attention for article published in Regional Environmental Change, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
Title
Modelling land cover change in the Brazilian Amazon: temporal changes in drivers and calibration issues
Published in
Regional Environmental Change, May 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10113-014-0614-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isabel M. D. Rosa, Drew Purves, João M. B. Carreiras, Robert M. Ewers

Abstract

Land cover change (LCC) models are used in many studies of human impacts on the environment, but knowing how well these models predict observed changes in the landscape is a challenge. We used nearly three decades of LCC maps to run several LCC simulations to: (1) determine which parameters associated with drivers of LCC (e.g. roads) get selected for which transition (forest to deforested, regeneration to deforested or deforested to regeneration); (2) investigate how the parameter values vary through time with respect to the different activities (e.g. farming); and (3) quantify the influence of choosing a particular time period for model calibration and validation on the performance of LCC models. We found that deforestation of primary forests tends to occur along roads (included in 95 % of models) and outside protected areas (included in all models), reflecting farming establishment. Regeneration tends to occur far from roads (included in 78 % of the models) and inside protected areas (included in 38 % of the models), reflecting the processes of land abandonment. Our temporal analysis of model parameters revealed a degree of variation through time (e.g. effectiveness of protected areas rose by 73 %, p < 0.001), but for the majority of parameters there was no significant trend. The degree to which model predictions agreed with observed change was heavily dependent on the year used for calibration (p < 0.001). The next generation of LCC models may need to embed trends in parameter values to allow the processes determining LCC to change through time and exert their influence on model predictions.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 2%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 124 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 19%
Researcher 23 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 25 19%
Unknown 8 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 48 37%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 22 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 16%
Engineering 5 4%
Computer Science 4 3%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 19 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 01 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,276,502
of 23,692,259 outputs
Outputs from Regional Environmental Change
#766
of 1,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,031
of 228,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Regional Environmental Change
#11
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,692,259 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,290 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 228,372 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.