↓ Skip to main content

Tree stability under wind: simulating uprooting with root breakage using a finite element method

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Botany, July 2014
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
160 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
Tree stability under wind: simulating uprooting with root breakage using a finite element method
Published in
Annals of Botany, July 2014
DOI 10.1093/aob/mcu122
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Windstorms are the major natural hazard affecting European forests, causing tree damage and timber losses. Modelling tree anchorage mechanisms has progressed with advances in plant architectural modelling, but it is still limited in terms of estimation of anchorage strength. This paper aims to provide a new model for root anchorage, including the successive breakage of roots during uprooting.

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 160 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 1 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 155 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 18%
Researcher 27 17%
Student > Master 12 8%
Student > Bachelor 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 4%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 55 34%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 23%
Engineering 27 17%
Environmental Science 25 16%
Computer Science 4 3%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 60 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 19 April 2017.
All research outputs
#5,585,748
of 32,463,143 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Botany
#1,597
of 4,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,867
of 261,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Botany
#21
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,463,143 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,616 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 261,864 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 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 51% of its contemporaries.