| Title |
Global Island Monitoring Scheme (GIMS): a proposal for the long-term coordinated survey and monitoring of native island forest biota
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biodiversity and Conservation, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10531-018-1553-7 |
| Authors |
Paulo A. V. Borges, Pedro Cardoso, Holger Kreft, Robert J. Whittaker, Simone Fattorini, Brent C. Emerson, Artur Gil, Rosemary G. Gillespie, Thomas J. Matthews, Ana M. C. Santos, Manuel J. Steinbauer, Christophe Thébaud, Claudine Ah-Peng, Isabel R. Amorim, Silvia Calvo Aranda, Ana Moura Arroz, José Manuel N. Azevedo, Mário Boieiro, Luís Borda-de-Água, José Carlos Carvalho, Rui B. Elias, José María Fernández-Palacios, Margarita Florencio, Juana M. González-Mancebo, Lawrence R. Heaney, Joaquín Hortal, Christoph Kueffer, Benoit Lequette, José Luis Martín-Esquivel, Heriberto López, Lucas Lamelas-López, José Marcelino, Rui Nunes, Pedro Oromí, Jairo Patiño, Antonio J. Pérez, Carla Rego, Sérvio P. Ribeiro, François Rigal, Pedro Rodrigues, Andrew J. Rominger, Margarida Santos-Reis, Hanno Schaefer, Cecília Sérgio, Artur R. M. Serrano, Manuela Sim-Sim, P. J. Stephenson, António O. Soares, Dominique Strasberg, Alain Vanderporten, Virgílio Vieira, Rosalina Gabriel |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 4 | 40% |
| Portugal | 1 | 10% |
| Austria | 1 | 10% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 60% |
| Scientists | 4 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 158 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 33 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 6% |
| Professor | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 27 | 17% |
| Unknown | 32 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 58 | 37% |
| Environmental Science | 38 | 24% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Unknown | 38 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 08 December 2023.
All research outputs
#2,776,187
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Biodiversity and Conservation
#400
of 2,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,091
of 344,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biodiversity and Conservation
#6
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,548 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 344,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.