| Title |
Amphibian recovery after a decrease in acidic precipitation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ambio, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13280-017-0988-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dag Dolmen, Anders Gravbrøt Finstad, Jon Kristian Skei |
| Abstract |
We here report the first sign of amphibian recovery after a strong decline due to acidic precipitation over many decades and peaking around 1980-90. In 2010, the pH level of ponds and small lakes in two heavily acidified areas in southwestern Scandinavia (Aust-Agder and Østfold in Norway) had risen significantly at an (arithmetic) average of 0.14 since 1988-89. Parallel with the general rise in pH, amphibians (Rana temporaria, R. arvalis, Bufo bufo, Lissotriton vulgaris, and Triturus cristatus) had become significantly more common: the frequency of amphibian localities rose from 33% to 49% (n = 115), and the average number of amphibian species per locality had risen from 0.51 to 0.88. In two other (reference) areas, one with better buffering capacity (Telemark, n = 21) and the other with much less input of acidic precipitation (Nord-Trøndelag, n = 106), there were no significant changes in pH or amphibians. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 7 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 23 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,593,994
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#466
of 1,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,977
of 437,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#10
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,633 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 437,757 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.