↓ Skip to main content

Stratifying ocean sampling globally and with depth to account for environmental variability

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
19 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
Stratifying ocean sampling globally and with depth to account for environmental variability
Published in
Scientific Reports, July 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41598-018-29419-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark John Costello, Zeenatul Basher, Roger Sayre, Sean Breyer, Dawn J. Wright

Abstract

With increasing depth, the ocean is less sampled for physical, chemical and biological variables. Using the Global Marine Environmental Datasets (GMED) and Ecological Marine Units (EMUs), we show that spatial variation in environmental variables decreases with depth. This is also the case over temporal scales because seasonal change, surface weather conditions, and biological activity are highest in shallow depths. A stratified sampling approach to ocean sampling is therefore proposed whereby deeper environments, both pelagic and benthic, would be sampled with relatively lower spatial and temporal resolutions. Sampling should combine measurements of physical and chemical parameters with biological species distributions, even though species identification is difficult to automate. Species distribution data are essential to infer ecosystem structure and function from environmental data. We conclude that a globally comprehensive, stratification-based ocean sampling program would be both scientifically justifiable and cost-effective.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 22%
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Master 6 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 28%
Environmental Science 12 22%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 7 13%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 14 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 30 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,490,687
of 25,392,205 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#14,313
of 139,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,529
of 337,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#373
of 3,637 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,205 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 139,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. 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 337,135 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,637 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.