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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Evidence of Coupled Carbon and Iron Cycling at a Hydrocarbon-Contaminated Site from Time Lapse Magnetic Susceptibility
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science & Technology, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1021/acs.est.7b02155 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anders L. Lund, Lee D. Slater, Estella A. Atekwana, Dimitrios Ntarlagiannis, Isabelle Cozzarelli, Barbara A. Bekins |
| Abstract |
Conventional characterization and monitoring of hydrocarbon (HC) pollution is often expensive and time consuming. Magnetic susceptibility (MS) has been proposed as an inexpensive, longterm monitoring proxy of the degradation of HC. We acquired repeated down hole MS logging data in boreholes at a HC contaminated field research site in Bemidji, MN, USA. The MS data were analyzed in conjunction with redox conditions and iron availability within the source zone in order to better assess whether MS can serve as a proxy for monitoring HC contamination in unconsolidated sediments. The MS response at the site diminished during the sampling period, which was found to coincide with depletion of solid phase iron in the source zone. Previous geochemical observations and modeling at the site suggest that the most likely cause of the decrease in MS is the transformation of magnetite to siderite, coupled with the exhaustion of ferrihydrite. Although the temporal MS response at this site gives valuable field-scale evidence for changing conditions of iron cycling and stability of iron minerals it does not provide a simple proxy for longterm monitoring of biodegradation of hydrocarbons in the smear zone. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 8 | 23% |
| Environmental Science | 6 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 9 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 07 June 2022.
All research outputs
#2,486,517
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Technology
#2,990
of 20,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,633
of 325,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Technology
#59
of 245 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,680 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.8. 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 325,640 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 245 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.