↓ Skip to main content

Correlates of Recent Declines of Rodents in Northern and Southern Australia: Habitat Structure Is Critical

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
15 news outlets
twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Correlates of Recent Declines of Rodents in Northern and Southern Australia: Habitat Structure Is Critical
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0130626
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J. Lawes, Diana O. Fisher, Chris N. Johnson, Simon P. Blomberg, Anke S. K. Frank, Susanne A. Fritz, Hamish McCallum, Jeremy VanDerWal, Brett N. Abbott, Sarah Legge, Mike Letnic, Colette R. Thomas, Nikki Thurgate, Alaric Fisher, Iain J. Gordon, Alex Kutt

Abstract

Australia has experienced dramatic declines and extinctions of its native rodent species over the last 200 years, particularly in southern Australia. In the tropical savanna of northern Australia significant declines have occurred only in recent decades. The later onset of these declines suggests that the causes may differ from earlier declines in the south. We examine potential regional effects (northern versus southern Australia) on biological and ecological correlates of range decline in Australian rodents. We demonstrate that rodent declines have been greater in the south than in the tropical north, are strongly influenced by phylogeny, and are consistently greater for species inhabiting relatively open or sparsely vegetated habitat. Unlike in marsupials, where some species have much larger body size than rodents, body mass was not an important predictor of decline in rodents. All Australian rodent species are within the prey-size range of cats (throughout the continent) and red foxes (in the south). Contrary to the hypothesis that mammal declines are related directly to ecosystem productivity (annual rainfall), our results are consistent with the hypothesis that disturbances such as fire and grazing, which occur in non-rainforest habitats and remove cover used by rodents for shelter, nesting and foraging, increase predation risk. We agree with calls to introduce conservation management that limits the size and intensity of fires, increases fire patchiness and reduces grazing impacts at ecological scales appropriate for rodents. Controlling feral predators, even creating predator-free reserves in relatively sparsely-vegetated habitats, is urgently required to ensure the survival of rodent species, particularly in northern Australia where declines are not yet as severe as those in the south.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 80 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Master 12 14%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 5 6%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 27 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 25 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Unspecified 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 29 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 121. 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 29 December 2022.
All research outputs
#336,091
of 24,945,754 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#4,804
of 216,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,487
of 269,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#131
of 6,734 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,945,754 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 216,166 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 269,339 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,734 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 98% of its contemporaries.