↓ Skip to main content

Soil Quality and Financial Performance of Biodynamic and Conventional Farms in New Zealand

Overview of attention for article published in Science, April 1993
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
4 policy sources
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
155 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
Soil Quality and Financial Performance of Biodynamic and Conventional Farms in New Zealand
Published in
Science, April 1993
DOI 10.1126/science.260.5106.344
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Biodynamic farming practices and systems show promise in mitigating some of the detrimental effects of chemical-dependent, conventional agriculture on the environment. The physical, biological, and chemical soil properties and economic profitability of adjacent, commercial biodynamic and conventional farms (16 total) in New Zealand were compared. The biodynamic farms in the study had better soil quality than the neighboring conventional farms and were just as financially viable on a per hectare basis.

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 2 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 155 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 3 2%
South Africa 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 147 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 19%
Student > Master 22 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Professor 10 6%
Other 29 19%
Unknown 33 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 65 42%
Environmental Science 27 17%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 7 5%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Engineering 4 3%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 33 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 23 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,339,577
of 28,766,646 outputs
Outputs from Science
#30,856
of 87,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#493
of 15,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#30
of 215 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,766,646 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 87,297 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 15,827 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 215 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.