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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Assessing strategies to mitigate phosphorus leaching from drained clay soils
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ambio, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13280-017-0991-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Barbro Ulén, Mats Larsbo, Johannes Koestel, Qarin Hellner, Maria Blomberg, Pia Geranmayeh |
| Abstract |
Assessing mitigation of phosphorus (P) leaching from subsurface drainage systems is challenging due to high spatial and temporal variation in leaching. Mean measured total P leaching from a clayey soil in an eight-year study period (four replicates per treatment) was (kg ha-1 year-1): 1.21 from shallow autumn tillage (ShT), 0.84 from unfertilised fallow (UF), 0.81 from conventional autumn ploughing (CT) and 0.57 from structure liming (SL-CT). Treatment was not significant using Richards-Baker flow index or a distance factor as covariate (p = 0.084 and 0.057). A tendency for lower leaching was obtained comparing SL-CT with ShT (p adjusted = 0.060 and 0.009 respectively). A combination of measures adapted to drainage conditions and clay content in different parts of the field is proposed since P leaching was approximately halved from an adjacent field (4.3 ha) in a three-year post-period compared with a three-year pre-period for structure liming the entire field and drainage system renovation plus structure lime drain backfilling. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 16% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 23% |
| Environmental Science | 6 | 19% |
| Engineering | 3 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 32% |
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 19 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,639,173
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#1,530
of 1,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#325,741
of 437,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#30
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 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 1,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% 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 437,845 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.