↓ Skip to main content

Pollinators, pests, and predators: Recognizing ecological trade-offs in agroecosystems

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio, September 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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
34 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
213 Mendeley
Title
Pollinators, pests, and predators: Recognizing ecological trade-offs in agroecosystems
Published in
Ambio, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s13280-015-0696-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manu E. Saunders, Rebecca K. Peisley, Romina Rader, Gary W. Luck

Abstract

Ecological interactions between crops and wild animals frequently result in increases or declines in crop yield. Yet, positive and negative interactions have mostly been treated independently, owing partly to disciplinary silos in ecological and agricultural sciences. We advocate a new integrated research paradigm that explicitly recognizes cost-benefit trade-offs among animal activities and acknowledges that these activities occur within social-ecological contexts. Support for this paradigm is presented in an evidence-based conceptual model structured around five evidence statements highlighting emerging trends applicable to sustainable agriculture. The full range of benefits and costs associated with animal activities in agroecosystems cannot be quantified by focusing on single species groups, crops, or systems. Management of productive agroecosystems should sustain cycles of ecological interactions between crops and wild animals, not isolate these cycles from the system. Advancing this paradigm will therefore require integrated studies that determine net returns of animal activity in agroecosystems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 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 213 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
France 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 205 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 17%
Researcher 36 17%
Student > Bachelor 20 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 31 15%
Unknown 34 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 87 41%
Environmental Science 56 26%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 1%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 1%
Other 11 5%
Unknown 49 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,141,239
of 24,585,148 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#178
of 1,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,015
of 274,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#4
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,585,148 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,753 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 274,285 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.