↓ Skip to main content

Heterogeneous responses of temperate-zone amphibian populations to climate change complicates conservation planning

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Heterogeneous responses of temperate-zone amphibian populations to climate change complicates conservation planning
Published in
Scientific Reports, December 2017
DOI 10.1038/s41598-017-17105-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. Muths, T. Chambert, B. R. Schmidt, D. A. W. Miller, B. R. Hossack, P. Joly, O. Grolet, D. M. Green, D. S. Pilliod, M. Cheylan, R. N. Fisher, R. M. McCaffery, M. J. Adams, W. J. Palen, J. W. Arntzen, J. Garwood, G. Fellers, J.-M. Thirion, A. Besnard, E. H. Campbell Grant

Abstract

The pervasive and unabated nature of global amphibian declines suggests common demographic responses to a given driver, and quantification of major drivers and responses could inform broad-scale conservation actions. We explored the influence of climate on demographic parameters (i.e., changes in the probabilities of survival and recruitment) using 31 datasets from temperate zone amphibian populations (North America and Europe) with more than a decade of observations each. There was evidence for an influence of climate on population demographic rates, but the direction and magnitude of responses to climate drivers was highly variable among taxa and among populations within taxa. These results reveal that climate drivers interact with variation in life-history traits and population-specific attributes resulting in a diversity of responses. This heterogeneity complicates the identification of conservation 'rules of thumb' for these taxa, and supports the notion of local focus as the most effective approach to overcome global-scale conservation challenges.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 21%
Student > Master 20 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 17 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 54 50%
Environmental Science 18 17%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 24 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 January 2018.
All research outputs
#9,059,924
of 15,787,841 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#40,224
of 82,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,329
of 409,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#5,992
of 13,324 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,787,841 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 82,175 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 409,232 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13,324 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.