↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Wildlife Detection and Observation Technologies at a Solar Power Tower Facility

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2016
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
58 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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.
Title
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Wildlife Detection and Observation Technologies at a Solar Power Tower Facility
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0158115
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert H. Diehl, Ernest W. Valdez, Todd M. Preston, Michael J. Wellik, Paul M. Cryan

Abstract

Solar power towers produce electrical energy from sunlight at an industrial scale. Little is known about the effects of this technology on flying animals and few methods exist for automatically detecting or observing wildlife at solar towers and other tall anthropogenic structures. Smoking objects are sometimes observed co-occurring with reflected, concentrated light ("solar flux") in the airspace around solar towers, but the identity and origins of such objects can be difficult to determine. In this observational pilot study at the world's largest solar tower facility, we assessed the efficacy of using radar, surveillance video, and insect trapping to detect and observe animals flying near the towers. During site visits in May and September 2014, we monitored the airspace surrounding towers and observed insects, birds, and bats under a variety of environmental and operational conditions. We detected and broadly differentiated animals or objects moving through the airspace generally using radar and near solar towers using several video imaging methods. Video revealed what appeared to be mostly small insects burning in the solar flux. Also, we occasionally detected birds flying in the solar flux but could not accurately identify birds to species or the types of insects and small objects composing the vast majority of smoking targets. Insect trapping on the ground was somewhat effective at sampling smaller insects around the tower, and presence and abundance of insects in the traps generally trended with radar and video observations. Traps did not tend to sample the larger insects we sometimes observed flying in the solar flux or found dead on the ground beneath the towers. Some of the methods we tested (e.g., video surveillance) could be further assessed and potentially used to automatically detect and observe flying animals in the vicinity of solar towers to advance understanding about their effects on wildlife.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 58 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 21%
Researcher 8 19%
Other 8 19%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 10 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 40%
Environmental Science 10 23%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 10 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 110. 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 07 February 2019.
All research outputs
#246,001
of 19,073,355 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#4,002
of 171,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,065
of 273,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#104
of 4,345 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,073,355 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 171,799 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 273,959 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,345 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 97% of its contemporaries.