↓ Skip to main content

137Cs in the meat of wild boars: a comparison of the impacts of Chernobyl and Fukushima

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#17 of 1,193)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
137Cs in the meat of wild boars: a comparison of the impacts of Chernobyl and Fukushima
Published in
Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10967-015-4417-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Georg Steinhauser, Paul R. J. Saey

Abstract

The impact of Chernobyl on the (137)Cs activities found in wild boars in Europe, even in remote locations from the NPP, has been much greater than the impact of Fukushima on boars in Japan. Although there is great variability within the (137)Cs concentrations throughout the wild boar populations, some boars in southern Germany in recent years exhibit higher activity concentrations (up to 10,000 Bq/kg and higher) than the highest (137)Cs levels found in boars in the governmental food monitoring campaign (7900 Bq/kg) in Fukushima prefecture in Japan. The levels of radiocesium in boar appear to be more persistent than would be indicated by the constantly decreasing (137)Cs inventory observed in the soil which points to a food source that is highly retentive to (137)Cs contamination or to other radioecological anomalies that are not yet fully understood.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Other 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 14 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 13 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 18%
Engineering 7 14%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 16 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 09 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,506,605
of 24,998,746 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry
#17
of 1,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,074
of 273,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry
#5
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,998,746 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,193 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 273,213 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.