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 |
At-Sea Associations in Foraging Little Penguins
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0105065 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maud Berlincourt, John P. Y. Arnould |
| Abstract |
Prey distribution, patch size, and the presence of conspecifics are important factors influencing a predator's feeding tactics, including the decision to feed individually or socially. Little is known about group behaviour in seabirds as they spend most of their lives in the marine environment where it is difficult to observe their foraging activities. In this study, we report on at-sea foraging associations of little penguins (Eudyptula minor) during the breeding season. Individuals could be categorised as (1) not associating; (2) associating when departing from and/or returning to the colony; or (3) at sea when travelling, diving or performing synchronised dives. Out of 84 separate foraging tracks, 58 (69.0%) involved associations with conspecifics. Furthermore, in a total of 39 (46.4%), individuals were found to dive during association and in 32 (38.1%), individuals were found to exhibit synchronous diving. These behaviours suggest little penguins forage in groups, could synchronise their underwater movements and potentially cooperate to concentrate their small schooling prey. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 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 Kingdom | 7 | 21% |
| Australia | 7 | 21% |
| United States | 3 | 9% |
| Turkey | 2 | 6% |
| Russia | 1 | 3% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 3% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 29 | 85% |
| Scientists | 4 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Israel | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 46 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 39% |
| Researcher | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 27 | 55% |
| Environmental Science | 8 | 16% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 2% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 11 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 125. 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 November 2015.
All research outputs
#343,256
of 25,856,713 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#4,874
of 225,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,872
of 244,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#105
of 4,734 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,856,713 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,498 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 97% 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 244,152 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,734 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 97% of its contemporaries.