↓ Skip to main content

Brook trout distributional response to unconventional oil and gas development: Landscape context matters

Overview of attention for article published in Science of the Total Environment, February 2018
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
18 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Brook trout distributional response to unconventional oil and gas development: Landscape context matters
Published in
Science of the Total Environment, February 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.02.062
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric R. Merriam, J. Todd Petty, Kelly O. Maloney, John A. Young, Stephen P. Faulkner, E. Terrence Slonecker, Lesley E. Milheim, Atesmachew Hailegiorgis, Jonathan Niles

Abstract

We conducted a large-scale assessment of unconventional oil and gas (UOG) development effects on brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) distribution. We compiled 2231 brook trout collection records from the Upper Susquehanna River Watershed, USA. We used boosted regression tree (BRT) analysis to predict occurrence probability at the 1:24,000 stream-segment scale as a function of natural and anthropogenic landscape and climatic attributes. We then evaluated the importance of landscape context (i.e., pre-existing natural habitat quality and anthropogenic degradation) in modulating the effects of UOG on brook trout distribution under UOG development scenarios. BRT made use of 5 anthropogenic (28% relative influence) and 7 natural (72% relative influence) variables to model occurrence with a high degree of accuracy [Area Under the Receiver Operating Curve (AUC)=0.85 and cross-validated AUC=0.81]. UOG development impacted 11% (n=2784) of streams and resulted in a loss of predicted occurrence in 126 (4%). Most streams impacted by UOG had unsuitable underlying natural habitat quality (n=1220; 44%). Brook trout were predicted to be absent from an additional 26% (n=733) of streams due to pre-existing non-UOG land uses (i.e., agriculture, residential and commercial development, or historic mining). Streams with a predicted and observed (via existing pre- and post-disturbance fish sampling records) loss of occurrence due to UOG tended to have intermediate natural habitat quality and/or intermediate levels of non-UOG stress. Simulated development of permitted but undeveloped UOG wells (n=943) resulted in a loss of predicted occurrence in 27 additional streams. Loss of occurrence was strongly dependent upon landscape context, suggesting effects of current and future UOG development are likely most relevant in streams near the probability threshold due to pre-existing habitat degradation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 15 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 8 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 13%
Computer Science 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 16 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 27 November 2019.
All research outputs
#1,764,820
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Science of the Total Environment
#2,351
of 29,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,172
of 455,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science of the Total Environment
#36
of 512 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 455,271 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 512 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.