↓ Skip to main content

Big Data in Ecology, Volume 51

Overview of attention for book
Big Data in Ecology, Volume 51
Academic Press
Attention for Chapter: Faster, Higher and Stronger? The Pros and Cons of Molecular Faunal Data for Assessing Ecosystem Condition
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#33 of 191)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
87 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
Chapter title
Faster, Higher and Stronger? The Pros and Cons of Molecular Faunal Data for Assessing Ecosystem Condition
Book title
Big Data in Ecology
Published in
Advances in Ecological Research, December 2014
DOI 10.1016/b978-0-08-099970-8.00003-8
Book ISBNs
978-0-08-099970-8
Authors

Katherine A Dafforn, Donald J Baird, Anthony A Chariton, Melanie Y Sun, Mark V. Brown, Stuart L Simpson, Brendan P Kelaher, Emma L Johnston, Katherine A. Dafforn, Donald J. Baird, Anthony A. Chariton, Melanie Y. Sun, Stuart L. Simpson, Brendan P. Kelaher, Emma L. Johnston, Dafforn, Katherine A., Baird, Donald J., Chariton, Anthony A., Sun, Melanie Y., Brown, Mark V., Simpson, Stuart L., Kelaher, Brendan P., Johnston, Emma L.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Australia 2 2%
United States 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 82 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 18%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 5 6%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 15 17%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 39%
Environmental Science 22 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 7%
Computer Science 3 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 17 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 17 November 2015.
All research outputs
#1,881,180
of 28,833,811 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Ecological Research
#33
of 191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,662
of 380,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Ecological Research
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,833,811 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 191 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 done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 380,810 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them