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.
X Demographics
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
地域の遺伝資源保全に配慮した緑化工のための埼玉県コナラ集団の遺伝的多様性評価
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the Japanese Society of Revegetation Technology, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.7211/jjsrt.41.402 |
| Authors |
白石 祐彰, 津田 吉晃, 高松 進, 津村 義彦, 松本 麻子 |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 2 | 25% |
| Unknown | 6 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 100% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 November 2020.
All research outputs
#6,717,345
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the Japanese Society of Revegetation Technology
#18
of 125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,399
of 359,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the Japanese Society of Revegetation Technology
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 125 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 359,528 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 72% of its contemporaries.