| Title |
The importance of considering genetic diversity in shark and ray conservation policies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Conservation Genetics, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10592-017-1038-3 |
| Authors |
Rodrigo Rodrigues Domingues, Alexandre Wagner Silva Hilsdorf, Otto Bismarck Fazzano Gadig |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 13% |
| United States | 3 | 13% |
| Australia | 2 | 8% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 4% |
| Brazil | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| South Africa | 1 | 4% |
| Thailand | 1 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 50% |
| Scientists | 9 | 38% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 247 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 247 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 47 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 39 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 10% |
| Researcher | 21 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 28 | 11% |
| Unknown | 80 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 77 | 31% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 41 | 17% |
| Environmental Science | 28 | 11% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 12 | 5% |
| Unknown | 80 | 32% |
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 18 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,081,261
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Genetics
#165
of 1,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,312
of 454,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Genetics
#6
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 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 1,206 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 454,449 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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 68% of its contemporaries.