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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Floral resources and habitat affect the composition of hummingbirds at the local scale in tropical mountaintops
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Journal of Biology, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1590/1519-6984.06913 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
LC Rodrigues, M Rodrigues |
| Abstract |
Hummingbird communities tend to respond to variation in resources, having a positive relationship between abundance and diversity of food resources and the abundance and/or diversity of hummingbirds. Here we examined the influence of floral resource availability, as well as seasonality and type of habitat on the composition of hummingbird species. The study was carried out in two habitats of eastern Brazilian mountaintops. A gradient representative of the structure of hummingbird community, based on species composition, was obtained by the ordination of samples using the method of non-metric multidimensional scaling. The composition of hummingbird species was influenced by the type of habitat and floral resource availability, but not by seasonality. Hummingbird communities differ between habitats mainly due to the relative abundance of hummingbird species. The variation in composition of hummingbird species with the variation in floral resource availability may be related to differences in feeding habits of hummingbirds. Hummingbird species with the longest bills visited higher proportions of ornithophilous species, while hummingbirds with shorter bills visited higher proportions of non-ornithophilous species. The results demonstrate that at local-scale the composition of hummingbird species is affected by the type of habitat and floral resources availability, but not by seasonality. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 27 | 96% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 27 | 96% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 May 2015.
All research outputs
#16,461,423
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Biology
#9
of 13 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,609
of 272,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Biology
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.9. This one scored the same or higher as 4 of them.
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 272,117 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.