| Title |
Lack of recognition of genetic biodiversity: International policy and its implementation in Baltic Sea marine protected areas
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ambio, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13280-016-0776-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda Laikre, Carina Lundmark, Eeva Jansson, Lovisa Wennerström, Mari Edman, Annica Sandström |
| Abstract |
Genetic diversity is needed for species' adaptation to changing selective pressures and is particularly important in regions with rapid environmental change such as the Baltic Sea. Conservation measures should consider maintaining large gene pools to maximize species' adaptive potential for long-term survival. In this study, we explored concerns regarding genetic variation in international and national policies that governs biodiversity and evaluated if and how such policy is put into practice in management plans governing Baltic Sea Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in Sweden, Finland, Estonia, and Germany. We performed qualitative and quantitative textual analysis of 240 documents and found that agreed international and national policies on genetic biodiversity are not reflected in management plans for Baltic Sea MPAs. Management plans in all countries are largely void of goals and strategies for genetic biodiversity, which can partly be explained by a general lack of conservation genetics in policies directed toward aquatic environments. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 2 | 29% |
| Italy | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Scientists | 2 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 109 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 11% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 23 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 24% |
| Environmental Science | 25 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 11% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 28 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 January 2022.
All research outputs
#1,959,619
of 23,571,271 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#343
of 1,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,241
of 300,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#5
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,571,271 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 300,567 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.