↓ Skip to main content

Stream Vulnerability to Widespread and Emergent Stressors: A Focus on Unconventional Oil and Gas

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Stream Vulnerability to Widespread and Emergent Stressors: A Focus on Unconventional Oil and Gas
Published in
PLoS ONE, September 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0137416
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sally A. Entrekin, Kelly O. Maloney, Katherine E. Kapo, Annika W. Walters, Michelle A. Evans-White, Kenneth M. Klemow

Abstract

Multiple stressors threaten stream physical and biological quality, including elevated nutrients and other contaminants, riparian and in-stream habitat degradation and altered natural flow regime. Unconventional oil and gas (UOG) development is one emerging stressor that spans the U.S. UOG development could alter stream sedimentation, riparian extent and composition, in-stream flow, and water quality. We developed indices to describe the watershed sensitivity and exposure to natural and anthropogenic disturbances and computed a vulnerability index from these two scores across stream catchments in six productive shale plays. We predicted that catchment vulnerability scores would vary across plays due to climatic, geologic and anthropogenic differences. Across-shale averages supported this prediction revealing differences in catchment sensitivity, exposure, and vulnerability scores that resulted from different natural and anthropogenic environmental conditions. For example, semi-arid Western shale play catchments (Mowry, Hilliard, and Bakken) tended to be more sensitive to stressors due to low annual average precipitation and extensive grassland. Catchments in the Barnett and Marcellus-Utica were naturally sensitive from more erosive soils and steeper catchment slopes, but these catchments also experienced areas with greater UOG densities and urbanization. Our analysis suggested Fayetteville and Barnett catchments were vulnerable due to existing anthropogenic exposure. However, all shale plays had catchments that spanned a wide vulnerability gradient. Our results identify vulnerable catchments that can help prioritize stream protection and monitoring efforts. Resource managers can also use these findings to guide local development activities to help reduce possible environmental effects.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Ecuador 1 2%
Unknown 44 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 26%
Student > Bachelor 8 17%
Student > Master 7 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 3 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 14 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 30%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 9%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 6 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 04 November 2015.
All research outputs
#683,053
of 6,532,138 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#16,350
of 99,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,845
of 203,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#877
of 5,828 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,532,138 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 99,338 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 203,770 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,828 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.