↓ Skip to main content

Modeling Reef Fish Biomass, Recovery Potential, and Management Priorities in the Western Indian Ocean

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 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
Modeling Reef Fish Biomass, Recovery Potential, and Management Priorities in the Western Indian Ocean
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0154585
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timothy R. McClanahan, Joseph M. Maina, Nicholas A. J. Graham, Kendall R. Jones

Abstract

Fish biomass is a primary driver of coral reef ecosystem services and has high sensitivity to human disturbances, particularly fishing. Estimates of fish biomass, their spatial distribution, and recovery potential are important for evaluating reef status and crucial for setting management targets. Here we modeled fish biomass estimates across all reefs of the western Indian Ocean using key variables that predicted the empirical data collected from 337 sites. These variables were used to create biomass and recovery time maps to prioritize spatially explicit conservation actions. The resultant fish biomass map showed high variability ranging from ~15 to 2900 kg/ha, primarily driven by human populations, distance to markets, and fisheries management restrictions. Lastly, we assembled data based on the age of fisheries closures and showed that biomass takes ~ 25 years to recover to typical equilibrium values of ~1200 kg/ha. The recovery times to biomass levels for sustainable fishing yields, maximum diversity, and ecosystem stability or conservation targets once fishing is suspended was modeled to estimate temporal costs of restrictions. The mean time to recovery for the whole region to the conservation target was 8.1(± 3SD) years, while recovery to sustainable fishing thresholds was between 0.5 and 4 years, but with high spatial variation. Recovery prioritization scenario models included one where local governance prioritized recovery of degraded reefs and two that prioritized minimizing recovery time, where countries either operated independently or collaborated. The regional collaboration scenario selected remote areas for conservation with uneven national responsibilities and spatial coverage, which could undermine collaboration. There is the potential to achieve sustainable fisheries within a decade by promoting these pathways according to their social-ecological suitability.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 151 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 35 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 18%
Student > Master 24 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Other 9 6%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 34 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 52 33%
Environmental Science 44 28%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 2%
Other 8 5%
Unknown 42 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 26 June 2016.
All research outputs
#630,047
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#8,850
of 195,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,626
of 298,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#247
of 4,931 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195,069 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 298,934 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,931 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 94% of its contemporaries.