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
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The biodiversity bank cannot be a lending bank
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Conservation Letters, June 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1755-263x.2010.00110.x |
| Authors |
Sarah A. Bekessy, Brendan A. Wintle, David B. Lindenmayer, Michael A. Mccarthy, Mark Colyvan, Mark A. Burgman, Hugh P. Possingham |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 4 | 15% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 12% |
| Canada | 2 | 8% |
| United States | 2 | 8% |
| Mexico | 1 | 4% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 4% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 4% |
| Belgium | 1 | 4% |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 20 | 77% |
| Scientists | 6 | 23% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 272 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 13 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 2% |
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| South Africa | 2 | <1% |
| India | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Mexico | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 238 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 69 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 42 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 9% |
| Other | 18 | 7% |
| Other | 43 | 16% |
| Unknown | 44 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 110 | 40% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 71 | 26% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 9 | 3% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 6% |
| Unknown | 47 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 31 October 2020.
All research outputs
#1,431,753
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Letters
#453
of 1,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,574
of 108,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Letters
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,075 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 53.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 108,539 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 94% 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 63% of its contemporaries.