↓ Skip to main content

The Diversity of Coral Reefs: What Are We Missing?

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2011
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 (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
18 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
205 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
650 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
The Diversity of Coral Reefs: What Are We Missing?
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0025026
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laetitia Plaisance, M. Julian Caley, Russell E. Brainard, Nancy Knowlton

Abstract

Tropical reefs shelter one quarter to one third of all marine species but one third of the coral species that construct reefs are now at risk of extinction. Because traditional methods for assessing reef diversity are extremely time consuming, taxonomic expertise for many groups is lacking, and marine organisms are thought to be less vulnerable to extinction, most discussions of reef conservation focus on maintenance of ecosystem services rather than biodiversity loss. In this study involving the three major oceans with reef growth, we provide new biodiversity estimates based on quantitative sampling and DNA barcoding. We focus on crustaceans, which are the second most diverse group of marine metazoans. We show exceptionally high numbers of crustacean species associated with coral reefs relative to sampling effort (525 species from a combined, globally distributed sample area of 6.3 m(2)). The high prevalence of rare species (38% encountered only once), the low level of spatial overlap (81% found in only one locality) and the biogeographic patterns of diversity detected (Indo-West Pacific>Central Pacific>Caribbean) are consistent with results from traditional survey methods, making this approach a reliable and efficient method for assessing and monitoring biodiversity. The finding of such large numbers of species in a small total area suggests that coral reef diversity is seriously under-detected using traditional survey methods, and by implication, underestimated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 650 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 1%
Brazil 7 1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Mexico 3 <1%
Namibia 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Malaysia 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Sweden 2 <1%
Other 15 2%
Unknown 603 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 116 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 108 17%
Researcher 104 16%
Student > Master 100 15%
Other 29 4%
Other 96 15%
Unknown 97 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 293 45%
Environmental Science 125 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 40 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 30 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 1%
Other 42 6%
Unknown 111 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 133. 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 April 2024.
All research outputs
#320,576
of 25,816,430 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#4,547
of 225,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,141
of 149,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#42
of 2,600 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,816,430 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,089 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. 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 149,395 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 2,600 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 98% of its contemporaries.