↓ Skip to main content

Limits and possibilities in the geolocation of humans using multiple isotope ratios (H, O, N, C) of hair from east coast cities of the USA*

Overview of attention for article published in Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Limits and possibilities in the geolocation of humans using multiple isotope ratios (H, O, N, C) of hair from east coast cities of the USA*
Published in
Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies, February 2016
DOI 10.1080/10256016.2016.1143821
Pubmed ID
Authors

Linda M. Reynard, Nicole Burt, Hannah E.C. Koon, Noreen Tuross

Abstract

We examined multiple natural abundance isotope ratios of human hair to assess biological variability within and between geographic locations and, further, to determine how well these isotope values predict location of origin. Sampling locations feature differing seasonality and mobile populations as a robust test of the method. Serially-sampled hair from Cambridge, MA, USA, shows lower δ(2)H and δ(18)O variability over a one-year time course than model-predicted precipitation isotope ratios, but exhibits considerable differences between individuals. Along a ∼13° north-south transect in the eastern USA (Brookline, MA, 42.3 ° N, College Park, MD, 39.0 ° N, and Gainesville, FL, 29.7 ° N) δ(18)O in human hair shows relatively greater differences and tracks changes in drinking water isotope ratios more sensitively than δ(2)H. Determining the domicile of humans using isotope ratios of hair can be confounded by differing variability in hair δ(18)O and δ(2)H between locations, differential incorporation of H and O into this protein and, in some cases, by tap water δ(18)O and δ(2)H that differ significantly from predicted precipitation values. With these caveats, randomly chosen people in Florida are separated from those in the two more northerly sites on the basis of the natural abundance isotopes of carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, and oxygen.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Other 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 5 21%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 7 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 17%
Environmental Science 2 8%
Engineering 2 8%
Chemistry 2 8%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,362,070
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies
#100
of 167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,528
of 297,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 167 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 297,860 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.