↓ Skip to main content

Collapse of the world’s largest herbivores

Overview of attention for article published in Science Advances, May 2015
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 (94th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
776 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1575 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Collapse of the world’s largest herbivores
Published in
Science Advances, May 2015
DOI 10.1126/sciadv.1400103
Pubmed ID
Authors

William J. Ripple, Thomas M. Newsome, Christopher Wolf, Rodolfo Dirzo, Kristoffer T. Everatt, Mauro Galetti, Matt W. Hayward, Graham I. H. Kerley, Taal Levi, Peter A. Lindsey, David W. Macdonald, Yadvinder Malhi, Luke E. Painter, Christopher J. Sandom, John Terborgh, Blaire Van Valkenburgh

Abstract

Large wild herbivores are crucial to ecosystems and human societies. We highlight the 74 largest terrestrial herbivore species on Earth (body mass ≥100 kg), the threats they face, their important and often overlooked ecosystem effects, and the conservation efforts needed to save them and their predators from extinction. Large herbivores are generally facing dramatic population declines and range contractions, such that ~60% are threatened with extinction. Nearly all threatened species are in developing countries, where major threats include hunting, land-use change, and resource depression by livestock. Loss of large herbivores can have cascading effects on other species including large carnivores, scavengers, mesoherbivores, small mammals, and ecological processes involving vegetation, hydrology, nutrient cycling, and fire regimes. The rate of large herbivore decline suggests that ever-larger swaths of the world will soon lack many of the vital ecological services these animals provide, resulting in enormous ecological and social costs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 259 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,575 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 15 <1%
Brazil 13 <1%
United Kingdom 9 <1%
South Africa 4 <1%
Italy 3 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Other 12 <1%
Unknown 1512 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 247 16%
Researcher 245 16%
Student > Master 245 16%
Student > Bachelor 202 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 72 5%
Other 243 15%
Unknown 321 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 597 38%
Environmental Science 413 26%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 45 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 31 2%
Social Sciences 16 1%
Other 92 6%
Unknown 381 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 937. 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 March 2024.
All research outputs
#18,273
of 25,738,558 outputs
Outputs from Science Advances
#267
of 12,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130
of 279,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science Advances
#3
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,738,558 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 12,490 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 119.6. 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 279,691 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 53 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 94% of its contemporaries.