↓ Skip to main content

Arctic sea ice, Eurasia snow, and extreme winter haze in China

Overview of attention for article published in Science Advances, March 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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
35 news outlets
blogs
8 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
52 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
3 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
Arctic sea ice, Eurasia snow, and extreme winter haze in China
Published in
Science Advances, March 2017
DOI 10.1126/sciadv.1602751
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yufei Zou, Yuhang Wang, Yuzhong Zhang, Ja-Ho Koo

Abstract

The East China Plains (ECP) region experienced the worst haze pollution on record for January in 2013. We show that the unprecedented haze event is due to the extremely poor ventilation conditions, which had not been seen in the preceding three decades. Statistical analysis suggests that the extremely poor ventilation conditions are linked to Arctic sea ice loss in the preceding autumn and extensive boreal snowfall in the earlier winter. We identify the regional circulation mode that leads to extremely poor ventilation over the ECP region. Climate model simulations indicate that boreal cryospheric forcing enhances the regional circulation mode of poor ventilation in the ECP region and provides conducive conditions for extreme haze such as that of 2013. Consequently, extreme haze events in winter will likely occur at a higher frequency in China as a result of the changing boreal cryosphere, posing difficult challenges for winter haze mitigation but providing a strong incentive for greenhouse gas emission reduction.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 52 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 69 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 20%
Researcher 13 18%
Unspecified 11 15%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 19 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 30 42%
Unspecified 17 24%
Environmental Science 15 21%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 4 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 363. 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 04 March 2019.
All research outputs
#28,518
of 13,020,564 outputs
Outputs from Science Advances
#228
of 2,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,640
of 256,415 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science Advances
#12
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,020,564 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,910 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 124.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 256,415 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 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.