↓ Skip to main content

Conserving connectivity: Human influence on subsidy transfer and relevant restoration efforts

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Conserving connectivity: Human influence on subsidy transfer and relevant restoration efforts
Published in
Ambio, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13280-017-0989-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emily V. Buckner, Daniel L. Hernández, Jameal F. Samhouri

Abstract

Conservation efforts tend to focus on the direct impacts humans have on their surrounding environment; however there are also many ways in which people indirectly affect ecosystems. Recent research on ecological subsidies-the transfer of energy and nutrients from one ecosystem to another-has highlighted the importance of nutrient exchange for maintaining productivity and diversity at a landscape scale, while also pointing toward the fragility of ecotones and vulnerability of subsidies to human activities. We review the recent literature on landscape connectivity and ecosystem subsidies from aquatic systems to terrestrial systems. Based on this review, we propose a conceptual model of how human activities may alter or eliminate the flow of energy and nutrients between ecosystems by influencing the delivery of subsidies along the pathway of transfer. To demonstrate the utility of this conceptual model, we discuss it in the context of case studies of subsidies derived from salmon, marine mammals, sea turtles, sea birds, and shoreline debris. Subsidy restoration may require a different set of actions from simply reversing the pathway of degradation. We suggest that effective restoration and conservation efforts will require a multifaceted approach, targeting many steps along the subsidy transfer pathway, to address these issues.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 21%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 11 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 12 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 13 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 11 November 2017.
All research outputs
#14,363,817
of 24,137,933 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#1,432
of 1,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,355
of 332,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#28
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,137,933 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,729 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 332,315 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.