| Title |
Uncertainties in a Baltic Sea Food-Web Model Reveal Challenges for Future Projections
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ambio, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13280-012-0324-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Susa Niiranen, Thorsten Blenckner, Olle Hjerne, Maciej T. Tomczak |
| Abstract |
Models that can project ecosystem dynamics under changing environmental conditions are in high demand. The application of such models, however, requires model validation together with analyses of model uncertainties, which are both often overlooked. We carried out a simplified model uncertainty and sensitivity analysis on an Ecopath with Ecosim food-web model of the Baltic Proper (BaltProWeb) and found the model sensitive to both variations in the input data of pre-identified key groups and environmental forcing. Model uncertainties grew particularly high in future climate change scenarios. For example, cod fishery recommendations that resulted in viable stocks in the original model failed after data uncertainties were introduced. In addition, addressing the trophic control dynamics produced by the food-web model proved as a useful tool for both model validation, and for studying the food-web function. These results indicate that presenting model uncertainties is necessary to alleviate ecological surprises in marine ecosystem management. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 2 | 2% |
| Denmark | 2 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 96 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 32 | 30% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Unknown | 12 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 39 | 37% |
| Environmental Science | 34 | 32% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 7 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 20 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 October 2015.
All research outputs
#8,195,550
of 25,270,999 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#1,129
of 1,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,767
of 178,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#15
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,270,999 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,784 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.3. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 178,284 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.