↓ Skip to main content

Crisis of Japanese Vascular Flora Shown By Quantifying Extinction Risks for 1618 Taxa

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2014
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Crisis of Japanese Vascular Flora Shown By Quantifying Extinction Risks for 1618 Taxa
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0098954
Pubmed ID
Authors

Taku Kadoya, Akio Takenaka, Fumiko Ishihama, Taku Fujita, Makoto Ogawa, Teruo Katsuyama, Yasuro Kadono, Nobumitsu Kawakubo, Shunsuke Serizawa, Hideki Takahashi, Masayuki Takamiya, Shinji Fujii, Hiroyuki Matsuda, Kazuo Muneda, Masatsugu Yokota, Koji Yonekura, Tetsukazu Yahara

Abstract

Although many people have expressed alarm that we are witnessing a mass extinction, few projections have been quantified, owing to limited availability of time-series data on threatened organisms, especially plants. To quantify the risk of extinction, we need to monitor changes in population size over time for as many species as possible. Here, we present the world's first quantitative projection of plant species loss at a national level, with stochastic simulations based on the results of population censuses of 1618 threatened plant taxa in 3574 map cells of ca. 100 km2. More than 500 lay botanists helped monitor those taxa in 1994-1995 and in 2003-2004. We projected that between 370 and 561 vascular plant taxa will go extinct in Japan during the next century if past trends of population decline continue. This extinction rate is approximately two to three times the global rate. Using time-series data, we show that existing national protected areas (PAs) covering ca. 7% of Japan will not adequately prevent population declines: even core PAs can protect at best <60% of local populations from decline. Thus, the Aichi Biodiversity Target to expand PAs to 17% of land (and inland water) areas, as committed to by many national governments, is not enough: only 29.2% of currently threatened species will become non-threatened under the assumption that probability of protection success by PAs is 0.5, which our assessment shows is realistic. In countries where volunteers can be organized to monitor threatened taxa, censuses using our method should be able to quantify how fast we are losing species and to assess how effective current conservation measures such as PAs are in preventing species extinction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 43 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 35%
Other 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 20 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 30%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Philosophy 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 6 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#2,352,521
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#29,990
of 194,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,039
of 228,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#640
of 4,367 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 228,693 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,367 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.