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 |
Challenges in Identifying Sites Climatically Matched to the Native Ranges of Animal Invaders
|
---|---|
Published in |
PLOS ONE, February 2011
|
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0014670 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Gordon H. Rodda, Catherine S. Jarnevich, Robert N. Reed |
Abstract |
Species distribution models are often used to characterize a species' native range climate, so as to identify sites elsewhere in the world that may be climatically similar and therefore at risk of invasion by the species. This endeavor provoked intense public controversy over recent attempts to model areas at risk of invasion by the Indian Python (Python molurus). We evaluated a number of MaxEnt models on this species to assess MaxEnt's utility for vertebrate climate matching. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 317 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 16 | 5% |
Mexico | 5 | 2% |
Brazil | 5 | 2% |
Germany | 4 | 1% |
United Kingdom | 4 | 1% |
Colombia | 3 | <1% |
Australia | 2 | <1% |
South Africa | 2 | <1% |
Portugal | 1 | <1% |
Other | 7 | 2% |
Unknown | 268 | 85% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 71 | 22% |
Student > Master | 63 | 20% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 58 | 18% |
Student > Bachelor | 25 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 18 | 6% |
Other | 46 | 15% |
Unknown | 36 | 11% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 185 | 58% |
Environmental Science | 68 | 21% |
Earth and Planetary Sciences | 11 | 3% |
Social Sciences | 4 | 1% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | <1% |
Other | 11 | 3% |
Unknown | 36 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 07 December 2016.
All research outputs
#1,254,387
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#16,636
of 193,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,865
of 183,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#119
of 1,258 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,366 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 183,355 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,258 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 90% of its contemporaries.