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 |
Critical considerations for the application of environmental DNA methods to detect aquatic species
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Methods in Ecology and Evolution, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1111/2041-210x.12595 |
| Authors |
Caren S. Goldberg, Cameron R. Turner, Kristy Deiner, Katy E. Klymus, Philip Francis Thomsen, Melanie A. Murphy, Stephen F. Spear, Anna McKee, Sara J. Oyler‐McCance, Robert Scott Cornman, Matthew B. Laramie, Andrew R. Mahon, Richard F. Lance, David S. Pilliod, Katherine M. Strickler, Lisette P. Waits, Alexander K. Fremier, Teruhiko Takahara, Jelger E. Herder, Pierre Taberlet |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 21% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 9% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| Chile | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 50% |
| Scientists | 14 | 41% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,263 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Costa Rica | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1250 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 225 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 214 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 207 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 160 | 13% |
| Other | 55 | 4% |
| Other | 132 | 10% |
| Unknown | 270 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 440 | 35% |
| Environmental Science | 254 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 164 | 13% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 20 | 2% |
| Engineering | 14 | 1% |
| Other | 59 | 5% |
| Unknown | 312 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 10 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,006,418
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Methods in Ecology and Evolution
#362
of 2,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,177
of 385,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in Ecology and Evolution
#13
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,469 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 385,214 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 46 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 71% of its contemporaries.