↓ Skip to main content

Gaps in Border Controls Are Related to Quarantine Alien Insect Invasions in Europe

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2012
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
96 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 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
Gaps in Border Controls Are Related to Quarantine Alien Insect Invasions in Europe
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0047689
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven James Bacon, Sven Bacher, Alexandre Aebi

Abstract

Alien insects are increasingly being dispersed around the world through international trade, causing a multitude of negative environmental impacts and billions of dollars in economic losses annually. Border controls form the last line of defense against invasions, whereby inspectors aim to intercept and stop consignments that are contaminated with harmful alien insects. In Europe, member states depend on one another to prevent insect introductions by operating a first point of entry rule--controlling goods only when they initially enter the continent. However, ensuring consistency between border control points is difficult because there exists no optimal inspection strategy. For the first time, we developed a method to quantify the volume of agricultural trade that should be inspected for quarantine insects at border control points in Europe, based on global agricultural trade of over 100 million distinct origin-commodity-species-destination pathways. This metric was then used to evaluate the performance of existing border controls, as measured by border interception results in Europe between 2003 and 2007. Alarmingly, we found significant gaps between the trade pathways that should be inspected and actual number of interceptions. Moreover, many of the most likely introduction pathways yielded none or very few insect interceptions, because regular interceptions are only made on only a narrow range of pathways. European countries with gaps in border controls have been invaded by higher numbers of quarantine alien insect species, indicating the importance of proper inspections to prevent insect invasions. Equipped with an optimal inspection strategy based on the underlying risks of trade, authorities globally will be able to implement more effective and consistent border controls.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 137 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 43 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 13%
Student > Master 17 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 27 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 68 47%
Environmental Science 27 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Social Sciences 3 2%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 29 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 17 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,064,259
of 24,541,341 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#13,888
of 211,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,127
of 190,086 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#242
of 4,835 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,541,341 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 211,942 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 190,086 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 4,835 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 95% of its contemporaries.