↓ Skip to main content

Global Analysis of Anthropogenic Debris Ingestion by Sea Turtles

Overview of attention for article published in Conservation Biology, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
blogs
6 blogs
policy
5 policy sources
twitter
46 X users
facebook
12 Facebook pages
reddit
5 Redditors
bluesky
1 Bluesky user

Readers on

mendeley
633 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Global Analysis of Anthropogenic Debris Ingestion by Sea Turtles
Published in
Conservation Biology, August 2013
DOI 10.1111/cobi.12126
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Ingestion of marine debris can have lethal and sublethal effects on sea turtles and other wildlife. Although researchers have reported on ingestion of anthropogenic debris by marine turtles and implied incidences of debris ingestion have increased over time, there has not been a global synthesis of the phenomenon since 1985. Thus, we analyzed 37 studies published from 1985 to 2012 that report on data collected from before 1900 through 2011. Specifically, we investigated whether ingestion prevalence has changed over time, what types of debris are most commonly ingested, the geographic distribution of debris ingestion by marine turtles relative to global debris distribution, and which species and life-history stages are most likely to ingest debris. The probability of green (Chelonia mydas) and leatherback turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) ingesting debris increased significantly over time, and plastic was the most commonly ingested debris. Turtles in nearly all regions studied ingest debris, but the probability of ingestion was not related to modeled debris densities. Furthermore, smaller, oceanic-stage turtles were more likely to ingest debris than coastal foragers, whereas carnivorous species were less likely to ingest debris than herbivores or gelatinovores. Our results indicate oceanic leatherback turtles and green turtles are at the greatest risk of both lethal and sublethal effects from ingested marine debris. To reduce this risk, anthropogenic debris must be managed at a global level.

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 profiles of 46 X users 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 633 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 %
Brazil 6 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Uruguay 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 618 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 101 16%
Student > Master 95 15%
Researcher 85 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 62 10%
Other 29 5%
Other 59 9%
Unknown 202 32%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 168 27%
Environmental Science 132 21%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 19 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 14 2%
Other 50 8%
Unknown 234 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 188. 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 04 June 2026.
All research outputs
#264,242
of 34,259,606 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Biology
#77
of 5,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,522
of 241,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Biology
#3
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,259,606 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,056 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 241,954 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.