↓ Skip to main content

Representation of Ecological Systems within the Protected Areas Network of the Continental United States

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
140 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.
Article details
Title
Representation of Ecological Systems within the Protected Areas Network of the Continental United States
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0054689
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

If conservation of biodiversity is the goal, then the protected areas network of the continental US may be one of our best conservation tools for safeguarding ecological systems (i.e., vegetation communities). We evaluated representation of ecological systems in the current protected areas network and found insufficient representation at three vegetation community levels within lower elevations and moderate to high productivity soils. We used national-level data for ecological systems and a protected areas database to explore alternative ways we might be able to increase representation of ecological systems within the continental US. By following one or more of these alternatives it may be possible to increase the representation of ecological systems in the protected areas network both quantitatively (from 10% up to 39%) and geographically and come closer to meeting the suggested Convention on Biological Diversity target of 17% for terrestrial areas. We used the Landscape Conservation Cooperative framework for regional analysis and found that increased conservation on some private and public lands may be important to the conservation of ecological systems in Western US, while increased public-private partnerships may be important in the conservation of ecological systems in Eastern US. We have not assessed the pros and cons of following the national or regional alternatives, but rather present them as possibilities that may be considered and evaluated as decisions are made to increase the representation of ecological systems in the protected areas network across their range of ecological, geographical, and geophysical occurrence in the continental US into the future.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 4 3%
Mexico 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 131 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 33 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 17%
Student > Master 22 16%
Other 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 5%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 21 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 44 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 31%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 26 19%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 January 2016.
All research outputs
#11,231,813
of 34,361,833 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#96,126
of 224,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,612
of 340,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,383
of 5,445 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,361,833 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 224,520 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 340,293 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,445 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 55% of its contemporaries.