↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of four modeling tools for the prediction of potential distribution for non-indigenous weeds in the United States

Overview of attention for article published in Biological Invasions, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Comparison of four modeling tools for the prediction of potential distribution for non-indigenous weeds in the United States
Published in
Biological Invasions, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10530-017-1567-1
Authors

Roger Magarey, Leslie Newton, Seung Cheon Hong, Yu Takeuchi, David Christie, Catherine S. Jarnevich, Lisa Kohl, Martin Damus, Steven I. Higgins, Leah Millar, Karen Castro, Amanda West, John Hastings, Gericke Cook, John Kartesz, Anthony L. Koop

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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 25%
Student > Master 9 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 46%
Environmental Science 9 19%
Linguistics 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 12 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 October 2017.
All research outputs
#16,629,958
of 24,466,750 outputs
Outputs from Biological Invasions
#1,956
of 2,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,898
of 322,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Invasions
#47
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,466,750 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,469 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 322,423 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.