↓ Skip to main content

Effects of Some Destructive Fishing Methods on Coral Cover and Potential Rates of Recovery

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, January 1997
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
292 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
Effects of Some Destructive Fishing Methods on Coral Cover and Potential Rates of Recovery
Published in
Environmental Management, January 1997
DOI 10.1007/s002679900006
Pubmed ID
Authors

JOHN W. MCMANUS, RODOLFO B. REYES, JR., CLETO L. NAÑOLA, JR.

Abstract

/ Effects of fishing with explosives (blastfishing) and sodium cyanide and of anchor damage on live coral were investigated on a heavily exploited fringing reef in Boli-nao, Philippines from 1987 to 1990. A simple balance-sheet model indicated that approximately 1.4%/yr of the hermatypic coral cover may have been lost to blasting, 0.4%/yr to cyanide, and 0.03%/yr to coral-grabbing anchors, the potential coral recovery rate reduced by about one third from 3.8%/yr in the absence of disturbances to 2.4%/yr. These figures are subject to considerable uncertainty due to compounding of errors during computation. Reefs with patchy coral cover are more susceptible to damage from blastfishing because of targeting by fishers. Reefs with smaller corals may have greater resilience, because each unit of radial colony growth contributes a greater per cent increase in areal cover. Blastfishing in particular may reduce resilience to natural perturbations, leading to assemblages of small, sparse corals and reduced patchiness.KEY WORDS: Destructive fishing; Blastfishing; Cyanide; Coral; Coral reef; Coastal management

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 292 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 %
Brazil 4 1%
Sweden 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Philippines 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Unknown 279 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 54 18%
Researcher 49 17%
Student > Bachelor 46 16%
Student > Master 35 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 5%
Other 45 15%
Unknown 49 17%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 111 38%
Environmental Science 82 28%
Engineering 9 3%
Social Sciences 9 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 3%
Other 17 6%
Unknown 56 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 13 December 2024.
All research outputs
#1,498,721
of 28,832,041 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#90
of 2,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,253
of 102,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,832,041 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,193 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 102,684 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 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