↓ Skip to main content

Caught in the Middle: Combined Impacts of Shark Removal and Coral Loss on the Fish Communities of Coral Reefs

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2013
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 (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
18 news outlets
blogs
6 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
107 X users
facebook
17 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
141 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
473 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
Caught in the Middle: Combined Impacts of Shark Removal and Coral Loss on the Fish Communities of Coral Reefs
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0074648
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan L. W. Ruppert, Michael J. Travers, Luke L. Smith, Marie-Josée Fortin, Mark G. Meekan

Abstract

Due to human activities, marine and terrestrial ecosystems face a future where disturbances are predicted to occur at a frequency and severity unprecedented in the recent past. Of particular concern is the ability of systems to recover where multiple stressors act simultaneously. We examine this issue in the context of a coral reef ecosystem where increases in stressors, such as fisheries, benthic degradation, cyclones and coral bleaching, are occurring at global scales. By utilizing long-term (decadal) monitoring programs, we examined the combined effects of chronic (removal of sharks) and pulse (cyclones, bleaching) disturbances on the trophic structure of coral reef fishes at two isolated atoll systems off the coast of northwest Australia. We provide evidence consistent with the hypothesis that the loss of sharks can have an impact that propagates down the food chain, potentially contributing to mesopredator release and altering the numbers of primary consumers. Simultaneously, we show how the effects of bottom-up processes of bleaching and cyclones appear to propagate up the food chain through herbivores, planktivores and corallivores, but do not affect carnivores. Because their presence may promote the abundance of herbivores, the removal of sharks by fishing has implications for both natural and anthropogenic disturbances involving the loss of corals, as herbivores are critical to the progress and outcome of coral recovery.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 107 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 473 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 4 <1%
Mexico 3 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
United Arab Emirates 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Other 7 1%
Unknown 451 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 88 19%
Student > Master 77 16%
Researcher 73 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 68 14%
Other 27 6%
Other 47 10%
Unknown 93 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 202 43%
Environmental Science 116 25%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 13 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 2%
Neuroscience 5 1%
Other 16 3%
Unknown 110 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 278. 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 01 March 2023.
All research outputs
#130,577
of 25,750,437 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#2,026
of 224,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#853
of 214,316 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#42
of 4,932 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,750,437 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 224,378 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 214,316 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 4,932 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 99% of its contemporaries.