↓ Skip to main content

Meteotsunamis in the Laurentian Great Lakes

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, November 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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
58 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Meteotsunamis in the Laurentian Great Lakes
Published in
Scientific Reports, November 2016
DOI 10.1038/srep37832
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam J. Bechle, Chin H. Wu, David A. R. Kristovich, Eric J. Anderson, David J. Schwab, Alexander B. Rabinovich

Abstract

The generation mechanism of meteotsunamis, which are meteorologically induced water waves with spatial/temporal characteristics and behavior similar to seismic tsunamis, is poorly understood. We quantify meteotsunamis in terms of seasonality, causes, and occurrence frequency through the analysis of long-term water level records in the Laurentian Great Lakes. The majority of the observed meteotsunamis happen from late-spring to mid-summer and are associated primarily with convective storms. Meteotsunami events of potentially dangerous magnitude (height > 0.3 m) occur an average of 106 times per year throughout the region. These results reveal that meteotsunamis are much more frequent than follow from historic anecdotal reports. Future climate scenarios over the United States show a likely increase in the number of days favorable to severe convective storm formation over the Great Lakes, particularly in the spring season. This would suggest that the convectively associated meteotsunamis in these regions may experience an increase in occurrence frequency or a temporal shift in occurrence to earlier in the warm season. To date, meteotsunamis in the area of the Great Lakes have been an overlooked hazard.

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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 35%
Student > Master 6 23%
Other 2 8%
Professor 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 11 42%
Environmental Science 5 19%
Engineering 5 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 125. 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 21 June 2021.
All research outputs
#211,439
of 18,911,980 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#2,495
of 101,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,866
of 406,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#137
of 4,833 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,911,980 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 101,548 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.0. 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 406,620 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,833 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.