↓ Skip to main content

Carbon stable isotope composition of modern and archaeological Cornelian cherry fruit stones: a pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Carbon stable isotope composition of modern and archaeological Cornelian cherry fruit stones: a pilot study
Published in
Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies, January 2018
DOI 10.1080/10256016.2017.1392516
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dragana Filipović, Uroš Gašić, Nikola Stevanović, Dragana Dabić Zagorac, Milica Fotirić Akšić, Maja Natić

Abstract

The carbon stable isotope content of Cornelian cherry stones collected from wild tree stands in Serbia, SE Europe, was measured using elemental analyser-isotope ratio mass spectrometry, with the aim of recording natural carbon isotope composition of the fruit stones and its possible variation. The results show a significant variation in the carbon isotope values; we identified several environmental factors that, along with a number of other possible determinants, likely contributed to this variation. The obtained data are compared with the measurement of carbon isotope content of an archaeological specimen of Cornelian cherry stone discovered at the Neolithic site of Vinča (ca. 5600-4500 BC) in Serbia. Notwithstanding the limitedness of the data and the complexity surrounding carbon fractionation and the isotopic variation, it is suggested that the differences/similarities in carbon isotope ratios between modern and archaeological Cornelian cherry stones, when measured for much larger assemblages, could potentially offer a glimpse into growing conditions of Cornelian cherry trees in the past.

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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 42%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 8%
Researcher 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 25%
Chemistry 2 17%
Social Sciences 2 17%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 8%
Environmental Science 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 January 2018.
All research outputs
#9,958,150
of 12,439,436 outputs
Outputs from Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies
#68
of 90 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#247,485
of 341,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,439,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 90 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 341,198 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.