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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Hearing Loss in Stranded Odontocete Dolphins and Whales
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, November 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0013824 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Mann, Mandy Hill-Cook, Charles Manire, Danielle Greenhow, Eric Montie, Jessica Powell, Randall Wells, Gordon Bauer, Petra Cunningham-Smith, Robert Lingenfelser, Robert DiGiovanni, Abigale Stone, Micah Brodsky, Robert Stevens, George Kieffer, Paul Hoetjes |
| Abstract |
The causes of dolphin and whale stranding can often be difficult to determine. Because toothed whales rely on echolocation for orientation and feeding, hearing deficits could lead to stranding. We report on the results of auditory evoked potential measurements from eight species of odontocete cetaceans that were found stranded or severely entangled in fishing gear during the period 2004 through 2009. Approximately 57% of the bottlenose dolphins and 36% of the rough-toothed dolphins had significant hearing deficits with a reduction in sensitivity equivalent to severe (70-90 dB) or profound (>90 dB) hearing loss in humans. The only stranded short-finned pilot whale examined had profound hearing loss. No impairments were detected in seven Risso's dolphins from three different stranding events, two pygmy killer whales, one Atlantic spotted dolphin, one spinner dolphin, or a juvenile Gervais' beaked whale. Hearing impairment could play a significant role in some cetacean stranding events, and the hearing of all cetaceans in rehabilitation should be tested. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 278 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Chile | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 262 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 60 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 50 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 43 | 15% |
| Other | 25 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 9% |
| Other | 45 | 16% |
| Unknown | 31 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 143 | 51% |
| Environmental Science | 52 | 19% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 12 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 11 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 20 | 7% |
| Unknown | 32 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 282. 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 15 December 2021.
All research outputs
#117,115
of 24,289,456 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#1,812
of 209,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#279
of 104,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#14
of 987 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,289,456 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 209,236 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. 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 104,083 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 987 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 98% of its contemporaries.