↓ Skip to main content

When can the cause of a population decline be determined?

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology Letters, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
14 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
When can the cause of a population decline be determined?
Published in
Ecology Letters, September 2016
DOI 10.1111/ele.12671
Pubmed ID
Authors

Trevor J. Hefley, Mevin B. Hooten, John M. Drake, Robin E. Russell, Daniel P. Walsh

Abstract

Inferring the factors responsible for declines in abundance is a prerequisite to preventing the extinction of wild populations. Many of the policies and programmes intended to prevent extinctions operate on the assumption that the factors driving the decline of a population can be determined. Exogenous factors that cause declines in abundance can be statistically confounded with endogenous factors such as density dependence. To demonstrate the potential for confounding, we used an experiment where replicated populations were driven to extinction by gradually manipulating habitat quality. In many of the replicated populations, habitat quality and density dependence were confounded, which obscured causal inference. Our results show that confounding is likely to occur when the exogenous factors that are driving the decline change gradually over time. Our study has direct implications for wild populations, because many factors that could drive a population to extinction change gradually through time.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Estonia 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 107 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 24%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Professor 6 5%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 15 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 61 54%
Environmental Science 23 20%
Mathematics 4 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 19 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 29 August 2017.
All research outputs
#3,335,977
of 19,298,685 outputs
Outputs from Ecology Letters
#1,592
of 2,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,538
of 279,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology Letters
#25
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,298,685 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,643 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.0. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 279,656 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.