↓ Skip to main content

Consumption choice by bears feeding on salmon

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, May 2001
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
126 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
233 Mendeley
Title
Consumption choice by bears feeding on salmon
Published in
Oecologia, May 2001
DOI 10.1007/s004420000590
Pubmed ID
Authors

S.M. Gende, T.P. Quinn, M.F. Willson

Abstract

Consumption choice by brown (Ursus arctos) and black bears (U. americanus) feeding on salmon was recorded for over 20,000 bear-killed fish from 1994 to 1999 in Bristol Bay (sockeye salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka) and southeastern Alaska (pink, O. gorbuscha and chum salmon O. keta). These data revealed striking patterns of partial and selective consumption that varied with relative availability and attributes of the fish. As the availability of salmon decreased, bears consumed a larger proportion of each fish among both years and habitats. When availability was high (absolute number and density of salmon), bears consumed less biomass per captured fish, targeting energy-rich fish (those that had not spawned) or energy-rich body parts (eggs in females; brain in males). In contrast, individual fish were consumed to a much greater extent, regardless of sex or spawning status, in habitats or years of low salmon availability. The proportion of biomass consumed per fish was similar for males and females, when spawning status was statistically controlled, but bears targeted different body parts: the body flesh, brain and dorsal hump in males and the roe in females. Bears thus appeared to maximize energy intake by modifying the amount and body parts consumed, based on availability and attributes of spawning salmon.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 4 2%
Canada 3 1%
Brazil 3 1%
United Kingdom 3 1%
United States 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Czechia 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Other 4 2%
Unknown 208 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 51 22%
Student > Master 44 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 17%
Student > Bachelor 25 11%
Other 18 8%
Other 33 14%
Unknown 22 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 139 60%
Environmental Science 50 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 <1%
Other 4 2%
Unknown 28 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 14 September 2023.
All research outputs
#7,489,529
of 25,738,558 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#1,533
of 4,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,241
of 42,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,738,558 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,519 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 42,684 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 67% 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 done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.