↓ Skip to main content

Natural History Traits Associated with Detecting Mortality Within Residential Bird Communities: Can Citizen Science Provide Insights?

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
Title
Natural History Traits Associated with Detecting Mortality Within Residential Bird Communities: Can Citizen Science Provide Insights?
Published in
Environmental Management, May 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00267-012-9866-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caren Beth Cooper, Kerrie Anne Therese Loyd, Tessa Murante, Matthew Savoca, Janis Dickinson

Abstract

Cat predation of birds in residential landscapes is ephemeral, unpredictable, and spatially dispersed, and thus requires many person-hours to observe. We sought to identify whether specific behaviors, traits, or feeding ecologies of birds contribute to their probability of cat-caused mortality around residences across temperate North America. In addressing this question, we evaluated citizen science data with respect to peer-reviewed species accounts (Birds of North America, BNA). Using information on cat predation from the BNA, we found that species that glean their prey from the ground or breed in nest boxes were three times more likely to be depredated by cats, while birds that hawk were over two times less likely to become cat prey than would be predicted by random chance. Data from citizen science sources also showed that birds using nest boxes had increased susceptibility to cat predation, as did those that use feeders and that glean from foliage. We caution that observations of predation by citizen science volunteers may be biased towards detection at feeders. Future research should focus on developing volunteer survey techniques for improving estimates of bird mortality rates and sources.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 102 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 17%
Student > Master 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Other 12 11%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 13 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 43 39%
Environmental Science 25 23%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Psychology 3 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 19 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 April 2023.
All research outputs
#3,025,909
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#202
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,899
of 176,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 176,141 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.