↓ Skip to main content

The Unusual Nature of Recent Snowpack Declines in the North American Cordillera

Overview of attention for article published in Science, June 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
8 blogs
twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
186 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
268 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
The Unusual Nature of Recent Snowpack Declines in the North American Cordillera
Published in
Science, June 2011
DOI 10.1126/science.1201570
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gregory T. Pederson, Stephen T. Gray, Connie A. Woodhouse, Julio L. Betancourt, Daniel B. Fagre, Jeremy S. Littell, Emma Watson, Brian H. Luckman, Lisa J. Graumlich

Abstract

In western North America, snowpack has declined in recent decades, and further losses are projected through the 21st century. Here, we evaluate the uniqueness of recent declines using snowpack reconstructions from 66 tree-ring chronologies in key runoff-generating areas of the Colorado, Columbia, and Missouri River drainages. Over the past millennium, late 20th century snowpack reductions are almost unprecedented in magnitude across the northern Rocky Mountains and in their north-south synchrony across the cordillera. Both the snowpack declines and their synchrony result from unparalleled springtime warming that is due to positive reinforcement of the anthropogenic warming by decadal variability. The increasing role of warming on large-scale snowpack variability and trends foreshadows fundamental impacts on streamflow and water supplies across the western United States.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 268 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 21 8%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 239 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 79 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 64 24%
Student > Master 35 13%
Professor 20 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 19 7%
Other 51 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 88 33%
Environmental Science 79 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 56 21%
Unspecified 22 8%
Engineering 7 3%
Other 16 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 116. 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 28 January 2019.
All research outputs
#128,209
of 13,288,667 outputs
Outputs from Science
#5,082
of 61,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,011
of 12,649,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#5,082
of 61,542 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,288,667 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 61,640 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 12,649,080 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61,542 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.