↓ Skip to main content

Challenges in Identifying Sites Climatically Matched to the Native Ranges of Animal Invaders

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2011
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
303 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 303 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 16 5%
Mexico 6 2%
Brazil 5 2%
Germany 4 1%
United Kingdom 4 1%
Colombia 3 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Other 7 2%
Unknown 253 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 70 23%
Student > Master 61 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 59 19%
Student > Bachelor 21 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 6%
Other 45 15%
Unknown 28 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 183 60%
Environmental Science 64 21%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 10 3%
Social Sciences 3 <1%
Engineering 2 <1%
Other 12 4%
Unknown 29 10%

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
#915,438
of 17,351,915 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#13,630
of 164,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,595
of 102,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#121
of 1,644 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,351,915 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 164,775 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. 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 102,329 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,644 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 92% of its contemporaries.