| Title |
Implications from the Use of Non-timber Forest Products on the Consumption of Wood as a Fuel Source in Human-Dominated Semiarid Landscapes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Management, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00267-015-0510-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maria Clara B. T. Cavalcanti, Marcelo Alves Ramos, Elcida L. Araújo, Ulysses P. Albuquerque |
| Abstract |
Little is known about what possible effects on wood resources might be caused by non-timber forest products (NTFPs). Here, we assessed the patterns of fuelwood consumption related to an NTFP (Caryocar coriaceum) oil extraction and how this non-domestic activity can indirectly increase the use pressure on fuelwood species in a protected area, semiarid of Brazil. We conducted semi-structured interviews, in situ inventories, phytosociological surveys, and analyses of wood quality to identify the set of woody plants used in oil production. Householders use large volumes of dry wood and a set of woody species, which are highly exploited. Additionally, many preferred species have low fuel potential and suffer much use pressure. The best fuelwood species are underused, what requires management strategies to improve their potential as a source of energy. As a result, we suggest some conservation and management actions of fuelwood resources related to the use of NTFPs. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Argentina | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 76 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 11% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 17% |
| Unknown | 18 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 25 | 30% |
| Environmental Science | 15 | 18% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 24 | 29% |
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 2015.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#1,820
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,239
of 279,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#45
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. 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 279,711 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 50 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.