↓ Skip to main content

Wind causes Totten Ice Shelf melt and acceleration

Overview of attention for article published in Science Advances, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
19 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
70 tweeters
facebook
6 Facebook pages
wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Wind causes Totten Ice Shelf melt and acceleration
Published in
Science Advances, November 2017
DOI 10.1126/sciadv.1701681
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chad A. Greene, Donald D. Blankenship, David E. Gwyther, Alessandro Silvano, Esmee van Wijk

Abstract

Totten Glacier in East Antarctica has the potential to raise global sea level by at least 3.5 m, but its sensitivity to climate change has not been well understood. The glacier is coupled to the ocean by the Totten Ice Shelf, which has exhibited variable speed, thickness, and grounding line position in recent years. To understand the drivers of this interannual variability, we compare ice velocity to oceanic wind stress and find a consistent pattern of ice-shelf acceleration 19 months after upwelling anomalies occur at the continental shelf break nearby. The sensitivity to climate forcing we observe is a response to wind-driven redistribution of oceanic heat and is independent of large-scale warming of the atmosphere or ocean. Our results establish a link between the stability of Totten Glacier and upwelling near the East Antarctic coast, where surface winds are projected to intensify over the next century as a result of increasing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 70 tweeters 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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 29%
Researcher 21 23%
Student > Master 13 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Professor 6 7%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 9 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 60 67%
Environmental Science 7 8%
Physics and Astronomy 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 12 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 211. 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 05 January 2020.
All research outputs
#72,142
of 14,554,126 outputs
Outputs from Science Advances
#553
of 4,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,314
of 317,701 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science Advances
#28
of 179 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,554,126 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 4,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 120.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 317,701 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 179 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.