↓ Skip to main content

Coping with differences in snow cover: the impact on the condition, physiology and fitness of an arctic hibernator

Overview of attention for article published in Conservation Physiology, November 2017
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 (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Coping with differences in snow cover: the impact on the condition, physiology and fitness of an arctic hibernator
Published in
Conservation Physiology, November 2017
DOI 10.1093/conphys/cox065
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The Earth's climate is changing at an unprecedented rate and, as ecologists, we are challenged with the difficult task of predicting how individuals and populations will respond to climate-induced changes to local and global ecosystems. Although we are beginning to understand some of the responses to changing seasonality, the physiological mechanisms that may drive these responses remain unknown. Using long-term data comparing two nearby populations (<20 km apart) of free-living arctic ground squirrels in northern Alaska, we have previously shown that the timing of spring snowmelt greatly influences their phenology of hibernation and reproduction in a population and site-specific manner. Here, we integrate these site-specific phenologies with body condition, stress physiology, reproductive success and juvenile recruitment to understand phenotypic selection in the two populations. We found that at the site with relatively late spring snowmelt and early autumn snow cover: (i) adult females were larger and in better body condition but had significantly higher stress hormone levels; (ii) females had similar numbers of comparably sized offspring, but offspring had higher stress hormone levels; and (iii) offspring density was lower just prior to hibernation. Thus, adult females at the two sites appear to use different coping strategies that allow them to maintain reproductive fitness; however, marked shortening of the active season because of later snowmelt in spring and earlier snow cover in autumn may compromise juvenile recruitment. We discuss the significance of these findings within the broader context of changing animal-environment relationships.

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 6 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 39 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 %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 21%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Other 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 11 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 46%
Environmental Science 5 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 10 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 11 January 2026.
All research outputs
#3,973,103
of 30,031,778 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Physiology
#208
of 930 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,283
of 459,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Physiology
#7
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 30,031,778 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 930 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 459,436 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 17 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 58% of its contemporaries.