↓ Skip to main content

An evaluation of semi‐automated methods for collecting ecosystem‐level data in temperate marine systems

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology and Evolution, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
28 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
An evaluation of semi‐automated methods for collecting ecosystem‐level data in temperate marine systems
Published in
Ecology and Evolution, May 2017
DOI 10.1002/ece3.3041
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kingsley J. Griffin, Luke H. Hedge, Manuel González‐Rivero, Ove I. Hoegh‐Guldberg, Emma L. Johnston

Abstract

Historically, marine ecologists have lacked efficient tools that are capable of capturing detailed species distribution data over large areas. Emerging technologies such as high-resolution imaging and associated machine-learning image-scoring software are providing new tools to map species over large areas in the ocean. Here, we combine a novel diver propulsion vehicle (DPV) imaging system with free-to-use machine-learning software to semi-automatically generate dense and widespread abundance records of a habitat-forming algae over ~5,000 m(2) of temperate reef. We employ replicable spatial techniques to test the effectiveness of traditional diver-based sampling, and better understand the distribution and spatial arrangement of one key algal species. We found that the effectiveness of a traditional survey depended on the level of spatial structuring, and generally 10-20 transects (50 × 1 m) were required to obtain reliable results. This represents 2-20 times greater replication than have been collected in previous studies. Furthermore, we demonstrate the usefulness of fine-resolution distribution modeling for understanding patterns in canopy algae cover at multiple spatial scales, and discuss applications to other marine habitats. Our analyses demonstrate that semi-automated methods of data gathering and processing provide more accurate results than traditional methods for describing habitat structure at seascape scales, and therefore represent vastly improved techniques for understanding and managing marine seascapes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 35%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 13 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 30%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 10 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 2018.
All research outputs
#2,246,167
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Ecology and Evolution
#1,228
of 8,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,321
of 327,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology and Evolution
#28
of 216 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,478 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 327,324 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 216 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.