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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Top-predator control-induced trophic cascades: an alternative hypothesis to the conclusion of Colman et al.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1098/rspb.2014.1251 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Benjamin L. Allen |
| Abstract |
Colman et al. (2014 Proc. R. Soc. B 281, 20133094. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2013.3094)) recently argued that observed positive relationships between dingoes and small mammals were a result of top-down processes whereby lethal dingo control reduced dingoes and increased mesopredators and herbivores, which then suppressed small mammals. Here, I show that the prerequisite negative effects of dingo control on dingoes were not shown, and that the same positive relationships observed may simply represent well-known bottom-up processes whereby more generalist predators are found in places with more of their preferred prey. Identification of top-predator control-induced trophic cascades first requires demonstration of some actual effect of control on predators, typically possible only through manipulative experiments with the ability to identify cause and effect. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Poland | 1 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 21 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 22% |
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 43% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 30% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
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 December 2014.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#10,686
of 11,331 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,151
of 359,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#149
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,331 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.4. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 359,647 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.