↓ Skip to main content

Organic carbon hidden in urban ecosystems

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, December 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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
12 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
170 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
231 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
Organic carbon hidden in urban ecosystems
Published in
Scientific Reports, December 2012
DOI 10.1038/srep00963
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jill L. Edmondson, Zoe G. Davies, Nicola McHugh, Kevin J. Gaston, Jonathan R. Leake

Abstract

Urbanization is widely presumed to degrade ecosystem services, but empirical evidence is now challenging these assumptions. We report the first city-wide organic carbon (OC) budget for vegetation and soils, including under impervious surfaces. Urban soil OC storage was significantly greater than in regional agricultural land at equivalent soil depths, however there was no significant difference in storage between soils sampled beneath urban greenspaces and impervious surfaces, at equivalent depths. For a typical U.K. city, total OC storage was 17.6 kg m(-2) across the entire urban area (assuming 0 kg m(-2) under 15% of land covered by buildings). The majority of OC (82%) was held in soils, with 13% found under impervious surfaces, and 18% stored in vegetation. We reveal that assumptions underpinning current national estimates of ecosystem OC stocks, as required by Kyoto Protocol signatories, are not robust and are likely to have seriously underestimated the contributions of urban areas.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 231 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 2%
Japan 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 225 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 46 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 19%
Student > Master 36 16%
Student > Bachelor 21 9%
Other 9 4%
Other 31 13%
Unknown 43 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 88 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 43 19%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 8 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 2%
Other 25 11%
Unknown 59 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 60. 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 01 September 2021.
All research outputs
#723,235
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#7,851
of 142,708 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,109
of 291,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#21
of 321 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 142,708 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 291,064 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 321 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 93% of its contemporaries.