↓ Skip to main content

Post-fledging movements of white-tailed eagles: Conservation implications for wind-energy development

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
Post-fledging movements of white-tailed eagles: Conservation implications for wind-energy development
Published in
Ambio, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s13280-016-0783-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fabio Balotari-Chiebao, Alexandre Villers, Asko Ijäs, Otso Ovaskainen, Sari Repka, Toni Laaksonen

Abstract

The presence of poorly sited wind farms raises concerns for wildlife, including birds of prey. Therefore, there is a need to extend the knowledge of the potential human-wildlife conflicts associated with wind energy. Here, we report on the movements and habitat use of post-fledging satellite-tagged white-tailed eagles in Finland, where wind-energy development is expected to increase in the near future. In particular, we examine the probability of a fledgling approaching a hypothetical turbine that is placed at different distances from the nest. We found that this probability is high at short distances but considerably decreases with increasing distances to the nest. A utilisation-availability analysis showed that the coast was the preferred habitat. We argue that avoiding construction between active nests and the shoreline, as well as adopting the currently 2-km buffer zone for turbine deployment, can avoid or minimise potential impacts on post-fledging white-tailed eagles.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 2%
Unknown 61 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Other 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 16 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 27%
Environmental Science 16 26%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 21 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 October 2023.
All research outputs
#6,026,058
of 24,716,872 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#906
of 1,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,921
of 304,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#10
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,716,872 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,759 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 304,408 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.