↓ Skip to main content

Meta-Analysis of Relationships between Human Offtake, Total Mortality and Population Dynamics of Gray Wolves (Canis lupus)

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2010
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
90 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
278 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
Meta-Analysis of Relationships between Human Offtake, Total Mortality and Population Dynamics of Gray Wolves (Canis lupus)
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2010
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0012918
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scott Creel, Jay J. Rotella

Abstract

Following the growth and geographic expansion of wolf (Canis lupus) populations reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho in 1995-1996, Rocky Mountain wolves were removed from the endangered species list in May 2009. Idaho and Montana immediately established hunting seasons with quotas equaling 20% of the regional wolf population. Combining hunting with predator control, 37.1% of Montana and Idaho wolves were killed in the year of delisting. Hunting and predator control are well-established methods to broaden societal acceptance of large carnivores, but it is unprecedented for a species to move so rapidly from protection under the Endangered Species Act to heavy direct harvest, and it is important to use all available data to assess the likely consequences of these changes in policy. For wolves, it is widely argued that human offtake has little effect on total mortality rates, so that a harvest of 28-50% per year can be sustained. Using previously published data from 21 North American wolf populations, we related total annual mortality and population growth to annual human offtake. Contrary to current conventional wisdom, there was a strong association between human offtake and total mortality rates across North American wolf populations. Human offtake was associated with a strongly additive or super-additive increase in total mortality. Population growth declined as human offtake increased, even at low rates of offtake. Finally, wolf populations declined with harvests substantially lower than the thresholds identified in current state and federal policies. These results should help to inform management of Rocky Mountain wolves.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 278 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
France 2 <1%
Romania 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 265 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 55 20%
Student > Master 49 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 16%
Student > Bachelor 26 9%
Other 16 6%
Other 49 18%
Unknown 38 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 151 54%
Environmental Science 64 23%
Social Sciences 5 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 1%
Psychology 2 <1%
Other 7 3%
Unknown 45 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 August 2023.
All research outputs
#743,589
of 25,002,204 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#9,971
of 216,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,014
of 104,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#43
of 934 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,002,204 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 216,891 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 104,245 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 934 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 95% of its contemporaries.