↓ Skip to main content

A hierarchical model of daily stream temperature using air-water temperature synchronization, autocorrelation, and time lags

Overview of attention for article published in PeerJ, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 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
A hierarchical model of daily stream temperature using air-water temperature synchronization, autocorrelation, and time lags
Published in
PeerJ, February 2016
DOI 10.7717/peerj.1727
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin H. Letcher, Daniel J. Hocking, Kyle O’Neil, Andrew R. Whiteley, Keith H. Nislow, Matthew J. O’Donnell

Abstract

Water temperature is a primary driver of stream ecosystems and commonly forms the basis of stream classifications. Robust models of stream temperature are critical as the climate changes, but estimating daily stream temperature poses several important challenges. We developed a statistical model that accounts for many challenges that can make stream temperature estimation difficult. Our model identifies the yearly period when air and water temperature are synchronized, accommodates hysteresis, incorporates time lags, deals with missing data and autocorrelation and can include external drivers. In a small stream network, the model performed well (RMSE = 0.59°C), identified a clear warming trend (0.63 °C decade(-1)) and a widening of the synchronized period (29 d decade(-1)). We also carefully evaluated how missing data influenced predictions. Missing data within a year had a small effect on performance (∼0.05% average drop in RMSE with 10% fewer days with data). Missing all data for a year decreased performance (∼0.6 °C jump in RMSE), but this decrease was moderated when data were available from other streams in the network.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 117 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 41 34%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 16%
Student > Master 19 16%
Other 7 6%
Student > Bachelor 5 4%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 17 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 48 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 18%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 13 11%
Engineering 9 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 26 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 June 2016.
All research outputs
#7,489,355
of 24,797,973 outputs
Outputs from PeerJ
#5,944
of 14,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,272
of 303,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PeerJ
#167
of 348 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,797,973 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 303,366 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 348 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.