| Title |
Selection of tawny owl (Strix aluco) flight feather shaft for biomonitoring As, Cd and Pb pollution
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-018-1477-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rita García Seoane, Zulema Varela Río, Alejo Carballeira Ocaña, José Ángel Fernández Escribano, Jesús Ramón Aboal Viñas |
| Abstract |
In this study, we determined the concentrations of As, Cd and Pb in the shaft of all primary flight feathers from ten tawny owl (Strix aluco) specimens, with the aim of selecting which shaft of the corresponding primary feather should be used in biomonitoring surveys to enable inter-individual comparisons of the levels of these metals. The birds had died between 2006 and 2013 and their bodies were stored in the various Wildlife Recovery Centres in Galicia (NW Spain). The analyses revealed a high degree of inter-shaft variability, mainly in the concentrations of As and Cd. However, it was possible to identify the most representative samples in each case: for As, the shaft of primary flight feather number 5 (S5) (which represented 11% of the total As excreted in all of the primary flight feathers); for Cd, the shaft of primary flight feather number 2 (S2) (11% of the total excreted); and for Pb, the shaft of primary flight feather number 8 (S8) (14% of the total excreted). However, the difficulties associated with the analytical determination of these pollutants in the shaft should be taken into account when this technique is applied in biomonitoring studies. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 33% |
| Researcher | 4 | 22% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 4 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 17% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 28% |
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 26 April 2018.
All research outputs
#16,223,992
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#3,738
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,753
of 332,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#79
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. 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 332,289 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 221 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 53% of its contemporaries.