↓ Skip to main content

Seismic Surveys Negatively Affect Humpback Whale Singing Activity off Northern Angola

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2014
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
5 policy sources
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
205 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
Seismic Surveys Negatively Affect Humpback Whale Singing Activity off Northern Angola
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0086464
Pubmed ID
Authors

Salvatore Cerchio, Samantha Strindberg, Tim Collins, Chanda Bennett, Howard Rosenbaum

Abstract

Passive acoustic monitoring was used to document the presence of singing humpback whales off the coast of Northern Angola, and opportunistically test for the effect of seismic survey activity in the vicinity on the number of singing whales. Two Marine Autonomous Recording Units (MARUs) were deployed between March and December 2008 in the offshore environment. Song was first heard in mid June and continued through the remaining duration of the study. Seismic survey activity was heard regularly during two separate periods, consistently throughout July and intermittently in mid-October/November. Numbers of singers were counted during the first ten minutes of every hour for the period from 24 May to 1 December, and Generalized Additive Mixed Models (GAMMs) were used to assess the effect of survey day (seasonality), hour (diel variation), moon phase and received levels of seismic survey pulses (measured from a single pulse during each ten-minute sampled period) on singer number. Application of GAMMs indicated significant seasonal variation, which was the most pronounced effect when assessing the full dataset across the entire season (p<0.001); however seasonality almost entirely dropped out of top-ranked models when applied to a reduced dataset during the July period of seismic survey activity. Diel variation was significant in both the full and reduced datasets (from p<0.01 to p<0.05) and often included in the top-ranked models. The number of singers significantly decreased with increasing received level of seismic survey pulses (from p<0.01 to p<0.05); this explanatory variable was included among the top ranked models for one MARU in the full dataset and both MARUs in the reduced dataset. This suggests that the breeding display of humpback whales is disrupted by seismic survey activity, and thus merits further attention and study, and potentially conservation action in the case of sensitive breeding populations.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 205 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Madagascar 1 <1%
Unknown 195 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 44 21%
Student > Bachelor 39 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 15%
Student > Master 27 13%
Other 18 9%
Other 20 10%
Unknown 27 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 109 53%
Environmental Science 46 22%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 8 4%
Engineering 3 1%
Social Sciences 2 <1%
Other 9 4%
Unknown 28 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 59. 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 November 2023.
All research outputs
#742,673
of 25,866,425 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#9,840
of 225,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,704
of 236,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#301
of 5,770 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,866,425 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,574 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 236,182 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,770 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 94% of its contemporaries.