↓ Skip to main content

Small-scale variability in a mosaic tropical rainforest influences habitat use of long-tailed macaques

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Small-scale variability in a mosaic tropical rainforest influences habitat use of long-tailed macaques
Published in
Primates, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10329-017-0630-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Chih Mun Sha, Siew Chin Chua, Ping Ting Chew, Hassan Ibrahim, Hock Keong Lua, Tze Kwan Fung, Peng Zhang

Abstract

Pristine habitats have generally been considered to be the most important ecological resource for wildlife conservation, but due to forest degradation caused by human activities, mosaics of secondary forests have become increasingly prominent. We studied three forest types in a mosaic tropical forest consisting of short secondary forest (SS), tall secondary forest (TS) and freshwater swamp forest (SF). These forests differed in stand structure and floristic composition, as well as phenological productivity of fruits, flowers and young leaves. We examined habitat use of long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) in relation to indices of phenological activity. The macaques used the SS for feeding/foraging more than the TS and the SF. This was because the SS had higher productivity of fruit, which is a preferred food resource for macaques. Stem densities of young leaves in the SS and the TS also influenced habitat use, as they provided more clumped resources. Use of SF was limited, but these forests provided more species-rich resources. Our results showed that M. fascicularis responded to small-scale variability in phenological activity between forest types found in a heterogeneous mosaic forest, with young secondary regrowth forests likely providing the most important food resources. Mosaic landscapes may be important as they can buffer the effects of temporal food resource variability in any given forest type. In our increasingly human-altered landscapes, a better understanding of the role of secondary forest mosaics is crucial to the conservation and management of wildlife habitats and the animals they support.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Master 4 10%
Lecturer 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 41%
Environmental Science 4 10%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Unspecified 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 9 23%
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 17 October 2017.
All research outputs
#18,573,839
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from Primates
#902
of 1,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,610
of 320,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Primates
#11
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,016 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.3. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 320,352 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.