| Title |
The harlequin ladybird, Harmonia axyridis: global perspectives on invasion history and ecology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biological Invasions, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10530-016-1077-6 |
| Authors |
Helen E. Roy, Peter M. J. Brown, Tim Adriaens, Nick Berkvens, Isabel Borges, Susana Clusella-Trullas, Richard F. Comont, Patrick De Clercq, Rene Eschen, Arnaud Estoup, Edward W. Evans, Benoit Facon, Mary M. Gardiner, Artur Gil, Audrey A. Grez, Thomas Guillemaud, Danny Haelewaters, Annette Herz, Alois Honek, Andy G. Howe, Cang Hui, William D. Hutchison, Marc Kenis, Robert L. Koch, Jan Kulfan, Lori Lawson Handley, Eric Lombaert, Antoon Loomans, John Losey, Alexander O. Lukashuk, Dirk Maes, Alexandra Magro, Katie M. Murray, Gilles San Martin, Zdenka Martinkova, Ingrid A. Minnaar, Oldřich Nedved, Marina J. Orlova-Bienkowskaja, Naoya Osawa, Wolfgang Rabitsch, Hans Peter Ravn, Gabriele Rondoni, Steph L. Rorke, Sergey K. Ryndevich, May-Guri Saethre, John J. Sloggett, Antonio Onofre Soares, Riaan Stals, Matthew C. Tinsley, Axel Vandereycken, Paul van Wielink, Sandra Viglášová, Peter Zach, Ilya A. Zakharov, Tania Zaviezo, Zihua Zhao |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 17% |
| South Africa | 3 | 10% |
| Belgium | 2 | 7% |
| United States | 2 | 7% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 3% |
| Hungary | 1 | 3% |
| Chile | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 70% |
| Scientists | 6 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 227 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 46 | 20% |
| Researcher | 33 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 41 | 18% |
| Unknown | 54 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 96 | 41% |
| Environmental Science | 31 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 18 | 8% |
| Unknown | 70 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 112. 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 03 November 2020.
All research outputs
#382,610
of 25,746,891 outputs
Outputs from Biological Invasions
#31
of 2,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,843
of 315,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Invasions
#1
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,746,891 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,549 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. 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 315,713 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.