↓ Skip to main content

Maintaining ecosystem function and services in logged tropical forests

Overview of attention for article published in Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
324 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
962 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
Maintaining ecosystem function and services in logged tropical forests
Published in
Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.tree.2014.07.003
Pubmed ID
Authors

David P. Edwards, Joseph A. Tobias, Douglas Sheil, Erik Meijaard, William F. Laurance

Abstract

Vast expanses of tropical forests worldwide are being impacted by selective logging. We evaluate the environmental impacts of such logging and conclude that natural timber-production forests typically retain most of their biodiversity and associated ecosystem functions, as well as their carbon, climatic, and soil-hydrological ecosystem services. Unfortunately, the value of production forests is often overlooked, leaving them vulnerable to further degradation including post-logging clearing, fires, and hunting. Because logged tropical forests are extensive, functionally diverse, and provide many ecosystem services, efforts to expand their role in conservation strategies are urgently needed. Key priorities include improving harvest practices to reduce negative impacts on ecosystem functions and services, and preventing the rapid conversion and loss of logged forests.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 962 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 9 <1%
Brazil 8 <1%
United States 4 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Indonesia 2 <1%
India 2 <1%
Colombia 2 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Other 11 1%
Unknown 919 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 173 18%
Researcher 164 17%
Student > Master 161 17%
Student > Bachelor 109 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 51 5%
Other 151 16%
Unknown 153 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 375 39%
Environmental Science 290 30%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 31 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 2%
Engineering 12 1%
Other 44 5%
Unknown 193 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 83. 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 09 January 2024.
All research outputs
#525,132
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Ecology & Evolution
#307
of 3,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,650
of 243,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Ecology & Evolution
#1
of 24 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 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 243,389 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 95% of its contemporaries.