↓ Skip to main content

Disturbance automated reference toolset (DART): Assessing patterns in ecological recovery from energy development on the Colorado Plateau

Overview of attention for article published in Science of the Total Environment, April 2017
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Disturbance automated reference toolset (DART): Assessing patterns in ecological recovery from energy development on the Colorado Plateau
Published in
Science of the Total Environment, April 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.034
Pubmed ID
Authors

Travis W. Nauman, Michael C Duniway, Miguel L Villarreal, Travis B. Poitras

Abstract

A new disturbance automated reference toolset (DART) was developed to monitor human land surface impacts using soil-type and ecological context. DART identifies reference areas with similar soils, topography, and geology; and compares the disturbance condition to the reference area condition using a quantile-based approach based on a satellite vegetation index. DART was able to represent 26-55% of variation of relative differences in bare ground and 26-41% of variation in total foliar cover when comparing sites with nearby ecological reference areas using the Soil Adjusted Total Vegetation Index (SATVI). Assessment of ecological recovery at oil and gas pads on the Colorado Plateau with DART revealed that more than half of well-pads were below the 25th percentile of reference areas. Machine learning trend analysis of poorly recovering well-pads (quantile<0.23) had out-of-bag error rates between 37 and 40% indicating moderate association with environmental and management variables hypothesized to influence recovery. Well-pads in grasslands (median quantile [MQ]=13%), blackbrush (Coleogyne ramosissima) shrublands (MQ=18%), arid canyon complexes (MQ=18%), warmer areas with more summer-dominated precipitation, and state administered areas (MQ=12%) had low recovery rates. Results showcase the usefulness of DART for assessing discrete surface land disturbances, and highlight the need for more targeted rehabilitation efforts at oil and gas well-pads in the arid southwest US.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 10%
Unknown 27 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 30%
Student > Master 6 20%
Lecturer 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 12 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 20%
Engineering 2 7%
Computer Science 1 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 7 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 08 February 2017.
All research outputs
#437,820
of 12,269,384 outputs
Outputs from Science of the Total Environment
#250
of 8,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,614
of 332,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science of the Total Environment
#27
of 369 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,269,384 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 332,418 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 369 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 92% of its contemporaries.