↓ Skip to main content

Spatial and temporal patterns of mass bleaching of corals in the Anthropocene

Overview of attention for article published in Science, January 2018
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
617 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1236 Mendeley
Title
Spatial and temporal patterns of mass bleaching of corals in the Anthropocene
Published in
Science, January 2018
DOI 10.1126/science.aan8048
Pubmed ID
Authors

Terry P. Hughes, Kristen D. Anderson, Sean R. Connolly, Scott F. Heron, James T. Kerry, Janice M. Lough, Andrew H. Baird, Julia K. Baum, Michael L. Berumen, Tom C. Bridge, Danielle C. Claar, C. Mark Eakin, James P. Gilmour, Nicholas A. J. Graham, Hugo Harrison, Jean-Paul A. Hobbs, Andrew S. Hoey, Mia Hoogenboom, Ryan J. Lowe, Malcolm T. McCulloch, John M. Pandolfi, Morgan Pratchett, Verena Schoepf, Gergely Torda, Shaun K. Wilson

Abstract

Tropical reef systems are transitioning to a new era in which the interval between recurrent bouts of coral bleaching is too short for a full recovery of mature assemblages. We analyzed bleaching records at 100 globally distributed reef locations from 1980 to 2016. The median return time between pairs of severe bleaching events has diminished steadily since 1980 and is now only 6 years. As global warming has progressed, tropical sea surface temperatures are warmer now during current La Niña conditions than they were during El Niño events three decades ago. Consequently, as we transition to the Anthropocene, coral bleaching is occurring more frequently in all El Niño-Southern Oscillation phases, increasing the likelihood of annual bleaching in the coming decades.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3,960 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 1,236 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1236 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 221 18%
Student > Master 199 16%
Researcher 195 16%
Student > Bachelor 191 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 51 4%
Other 167 14%
Unknown 212 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 333 27%
Environmental Science 313 25%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 136 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 81 7%
Engineering 18 1%
Other 86 7%
Unknown 269 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3219. 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 10 December 2020.
All research outputs
#746
of 16,634,238 outputs
Outputs from Science
#56
of 69,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17
of 413,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#1
of 987 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,634,238 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 69,416 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 53.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 413,273 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 987 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 99% of its contemporaries.