↓ Skip to main content

Identifying and Eliminating Sources of Recreational Water Quality Degradation along an Urban Coast

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Environmental Quality, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#17 of 1,957)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 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
Identifying and Eliminating Sources of Recreational Water Quality Degradation along an Urban Coast
Published in
Journal of Environmental Quality, January 2018
DOI 10.2134/jeq2017.11.0461
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meredith B. Nevers, Murulee N. Byappanahalli, Dawn Shively, Paul M. Buszka, P. Ryan Jackson, Mantha S. Phanikumar

Abstract

Restoration of highly degraded urban coastal waters often requires large-scale, complex projects, but in the interim, smaller-scale efforts can provide immediate improvements to water quality conditions for visitor use. We examined short-term efforts to improve recreational water quality near the Grand Calumet River (GC) in the Laurentian Great Lakes. Identified as an Area of Concern (AOC) by the International Joint Commission, the GC has experienced years of industrial and municipal waste discharges, and as a result, coastal beaches have some of the highest rates of beach closings (>70%) in the United States. Project objectives were to identify sources of microbial contamination and to evaluate a short-term management solution to decrease beach closings: during 2015 (partial) and 2016 (season-long), canines were used to deter gull presence. Water samples were analyzed for in 2015 and 2016, and fecal sources were evaluated using microbial source tracking markers (2015): human ( HF183, ), gull (Gull2), and dog (DogBact). Hydrometeorological conditions were simultaneously measured. Results indicated that human, gull, and canine fecal sources were present, with gulls being the dominant source. densities were highly correlated with number of gulls present, Gull2 marker, and turbidity. Gull deterrence decreased and Gull2 marker detection during 2015, but numbers rebounded after program completion. The full-season program in 2016 resulted in lower densities and fewer beach closings. Large-scale restoration efforts are underway at this location, but short-term, small-scale projects can be useful for reducing beach closings and restoring ecosystem services.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 20%
Other 2 20%
Researcher 2 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 20%
Student > Postgraduate 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 4 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 40%
Unspecified 2 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 59. 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 11 July 2019.
All research outputs
#294,968
of 13,601,191 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Environmental Quality
#17
of 1,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,425
of 269,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Environmental Quality
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,601,191 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,957 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. 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 269,262 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them