↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the relationship between temporal changes in land use and resulting water quality

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Pollution, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
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.
Title
Evaluating the relationship between temporal changes in land use and resulting water quality
Published in
Environmental Pollution, December 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.envpol.2017.11.096
Pubmed ID
Authors

Buddhi Wijesiri, Kaveh Deilami, Ashantha Goonetilleke

Abstract

Changes in land use have a direct impact on receiving water quality. Effective mitigation strategies require the accurate prediction of water quality in order to enhance community well-being and ecosystem health. The research study employed Bayesian Network modelling to investigate the validity of using cross-sectional and longitudinal data on water quality and land use for predicting water quality in a mixed use catchment and the role it plays in the generation of blue-green algae in the receiving marine environment. Bayesian Network modelling showed that cross-sectional and longitudinal data analyses generate contrasting information about the influence of different land uses on surface water pollution. The modelling outcomes highlighted the lack of reliability in cross-sectional data analysis, based on the indication of spurious relationships between water quality and land use. On the other hand, the longitudinal data analysis, which accounted for changes in water quality and land use over a ten-year period, informed how catchment water quality varies in response to temporal changes in land use. The longitudinal data analysis further revealed that the types of anthropogenic activities have a more significant influence on pollutant generation than the change in the area extent of different land uses over time. Therefore, the careful interpretation of the findings derived solely from cross-sectional data analysis is important in the design of long-term strategies for pollution mitigation.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 151 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 21%
Student > Master 25 17%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 24 16%
Unknown 37 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 46 30%
Engineering 20 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 4%
Chemistry 5 3%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 48 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 December 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Pollution
#10,058
of 13,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#387,416
of 447,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Pollution
#153
of 193 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 447,689 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 193 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.