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 |
Eating from the wild: diversity of wild edible plants used by Tibetans in Shangri-la region, Yunnan, China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-4269-9-28 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yan Ju, Jingxian Zhuo, Bo Liu, Chunlin Long |
| Abstract |
Locally harvested wild edible plants (WEPs) provide food as well as cash income for indigenous people and are of great importance in ensuring global food security. Some also play a significant role in maintaining the productivity and stability of traditional agro-ecosystems. Shangri-la region of Yunnan Province, SW China, is regarded as a biodiversity hotspot. People living there have accumulated traditional knowledge about plants. However, with economic development, WEPs are threatened and the associated traditional knowledge is in danger of being lost. Therefore, ethnobotanical surveys were conducted throughout this area to investigate and document the wild edible plants traditionally used by local Tibetan people. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 3 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 11% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 11% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 11% |
| France | 1 | 11% |
| Australia | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 190 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 16% |
| Researcher | 24 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 7% |
| Other | 37 | 19% |
| Unknown | 51 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 57 | 29% |
| Environmental Science | 25 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 19 | 10% |
| Arts and Humanities | 7 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 25 | 13% |
| Unknown | 55 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 28 August 2020.
All research outputs
#3,161,890
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#100
of 731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,778
of 197,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#4
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 197,527 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.