↓ Skip to main content

The conservation genetics juggling act: integrating genetics and ecology, science and policy

Overview of attention for article published in Evolutionary Applications, December 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 (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 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
The conservation genetics juggling act: integrating genetics and ecology, science and policy
Published in
Evolutionary Applications, December 2015
DOI 10.1111/eva.12337
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan M. Haig, Mark. P. Miller, Renee Bellinger, Hope M. Draheim, Dacey M. Mercer, Thomas D. Mullins

Abstract

The field of conservation genetics, when properly implemented, is a constant juggling act integrating molecular genetics, ecology, and demography with applied aspects concerning managing declining species or implementing conservation laws and policies. This young field has grown substantially since the 1980s following the development of polymerase chain reaction and now into the genomics era. Our laboratory has 'grown up' with the field, having worked on these issues for over three decades. Our multidisciplinary approach entails understanding the behavior and ecology of species as well as the underlying processes that contribute to genetic viability. Taking this holistic approach provides a comprehensive understanding of factors that influence species persistence and evolutionary potential while considering annual challenges that occur throughout their life cycle. As a federal laboratory, we are often addressing the needs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in their efforts to list, de-list, or recover species. Nevertheless, there remains an overall communication gap between research geneticists and biologists who are charged with implementing their results. Therefore, we outline the need for a National Center for Small Population Biology to ameliorate this problem and provide organizations charged with making status decisions firmer ground from which to make their critical decisions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 137 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 21%
Researcher 29 20%
Student > Master 24 17%
Student > Bachelor 16 11%
Other 11 8%
Other 34 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 96 66%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 12%
Unspecified 14 10%
Environmental Science 14 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 <1%
Other 2 1%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 13 July 2017.
All research outputs
#1,105,031
of 11,465,445 outputs
Outputs from Evolutionary Applications
#181
of 696 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,270
of 251,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolutionary Applications
#6
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,465,445 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 696 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 251,196 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.