↓ Skip to main content

Minimizing irrigation water demand: An evaluation of shifting planting dates in Sri Lanka

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Minimizing irrigation water demand: An evaluation of shifting planting dates in Sri Lanka
Published in
Ambio, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13280-017-0993-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashley Rivera, Thushara Gunda, George M. Hornberger

Abstract

Climate change coupled with increasing demands for water necessitates an improved understanding of the water-food nexus at a scale local enough to inform farmer adaptations. Such assessments are particularly important for nations with significant small-scale farming and high spatial variability in climate, such as Sri Lanka. By comparing historical patterns of irrigation water requirements (IWRs) to rice planting records, we estimate that shifting rice planting dates to earlier in the season could yield water savings of up to 6%. Our findings demonstrate the potential of low-cost adaptation strategies to help meet crop production demands in water-scarce environments. This local-scale assessment of IWRs in Sri Lanka highlights the value of using historical data to inform agricultural management of water resources when high-skilled forecasts are not available. Given national policies prioritizing in-country production and farmers' sensitivities to water stress, decision-makers should consider local degrees of climate variability in institutional design of irrigation management structures.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Master 3 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 19 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 6 11%
Social Sciences 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 12 22%
Unknown 23 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 04 April 2019.
All research outputs
#2,236,944
of 24,213,825 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#397
of 1,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,149
of 446,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#8
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,213,825 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 446,618 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.