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 |
Non-Invasive Genetic Monitoring of Wild Central Chimpanzees
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, March 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0014761 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mimi Arandjelovic, Josephine Head, Luisa I. Rabanal, Grit Schubert, Elisabeth Mettke, Christophe Boesch, Martha M. Robbins, Linda Vigilant |
| Abstract |
An assessment of population size and structure is an important first step in devising conservation and management plans for endangered species. Many threatened animals are elusive, rare and live in habitats that prohibit directly counting individuals. For example, a well-founded estimate of the number of great apes currently living in the wild is lacking. Developing methods to obtain accurate population estimates for these species is a priority for their conservation management. Genotyping non-invasively collected faecal samples is an effective way of evaluating a species' population size without disruption, and can also reveal details concerning population structure. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Kenya | 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 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 158 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 42 | 25% |
| Researcher | 38 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 20 | 12% |
| Unknown | 17 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 91 | 55% |
| Environmental Science | 29 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Unknown | 19 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 27 January 2021.
All research outputs
#1,715,402
of 22,656,971 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#22,107
of 193,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,318
of 107,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#192
of 1,458 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,656,971 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,432 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 107,964 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,458 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.