↓ Skip to main content

The extent of population genetic subdivision differs among four co-distributed shark species in the Indo-Australian archipelago

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, February 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
96 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
The extent of population genetic subdivision differs among four co-distributed shark species in the Indo-Australian archipelago
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, February 2009
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-9-40
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jenny R Ovenden, Tom Kashiwagi, Damien Broderick, Jenny Giles, John Salini

Abstract

The territorial fishing zones of Australia and Indonesia are contiguous to the north of Australia in the Timor and Arafura Seas and in the Indian Ocean to the north of Christmas Island. The area surrounding the shared boundary consists of a variety of bio-diverse marine habitats including shallow continental shelf waters, oceanic trenches and numerous offshore islands. Both countries exploit a variety of fisheries species, including whaler (Carcharhinus spp.) and hammerhead sharks (Sphyrna spp.). Despite their differences in social and financial arrangements, the two countries are motivated to develop complementary co-management practices to achieve resource sustainability. An essential starting point is knowledge of the degree of population subdivision, and hence fisheries stock status, in exploited species.

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 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Uruguay 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Puerto Rico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 203 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 22%
Researcher 38 18%
Student > Master 36 17%
Student > Bachelor 28 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 5%
Other 33 15%
Unknown 24 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 139 64%
Environmental Science 19 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 7 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 <1%
Other 14 6%
Unknown 26 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 May 2020.
All research outputs
#7,959,659
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1,833
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,951
of 189,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#19
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 189,138 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 51% of its contemporaries.