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 |
The Precision Problem in Conservation and Restoration
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trends in Ecology & Evolution, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.tree.2016.08.001 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. Kevin Hiers, Stephen T. Jackson, Richard J. Hobbs, Emily S. Bernhardt, Leonie E. Valentine |
| Abstract |
Within the varied contexts of environmental policy, conservation of imperilled species populations, and restoration of damaged habitats, an emphasis on idealized optimal conditions has led to increasingly specific targets for management. Overly-precise conservation targets can reduce habitat variability at multiple scales, with unintended consequences for future ecological resilience. We describe this dilemma in the context of endangered species management, stream restoration, and climate-change adaptation. Inappropriate application of conservation targets can be expensive, with marginal conservation benefit. Reduced habitat variability can limit options for managers trying to balance competing objectives with limited resources. Conservation policies should embrace habitat variability, expand decision-space appropriately, and support adaptation to local circumstances to increase ecological resilience in a rapidly changing world. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 States | 5 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 15% |
| Brazil | 2 | 10% |
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Italy | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 75% |
| Scientists | 3 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 256 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 249 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 48 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 45 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 36 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 6% |
| Other | 43 | 17% |
| Unknown | 47 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 88 | 34% |
| Environmental Science | 79 | 31% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Engineering | 6 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 4% |
| Unknown | 63 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 19 February 2019.
All research outputs
#2,367,828
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Ecology & Evolution
#1,258
of 3,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,399
of 335,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Ecology & Evolution
#18
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,201 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 335,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.