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 |
Patterns of Host-Associated Fecal Indicators Driven by Hydrology, Precipitation, and Land Use Attributes in Great Lakes Watersheds
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science & Technology, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1021/acs.est.8b01945 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Deborah K. Dila, Steven R. Corsi, Peter L. Lenaker, Austin K. Baldwin, Melinda J. Bootsma, Sandra L. McLellan |
| Abstract |
Fecal contamination from sewage and agricultural runoff is a pervasive problem in Great Lakes watersheds. Most work examining fecal pollution loads rely on discrete samples of fecal indicators and modeling land use. In this study, we made empirical measurements of human and ruminant-associated fecal indicator bacteria and combined these with hydrological measurements in eight watersheds ranging from predominantly forested to highly urbanized. Flow composited river samples were collected over low-flow ( n = 89) and rainfall or snowmelt runoff events ( n = 130). Approximately 90% of samples had evidence of human fecal pollution, with highest loads from urban watersheds. Ruminant indicators were found in ∼60-100% of runoff-event samples in agricultural watersheds, with concentrations and loads related to cattle density. Rain depth, season, agricultural tile drainage, and human or cattle density explained variability in daily flux of human or ruminant indicators. Mapping host-associated indicator loads to watershed discharge points sheds light on the type, level, and possible health risk from fecal pollution entering the Great Lakes and can inform total maximum daily load implementation and other management practices to target specific fecal pollution sources. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 23 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 16 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 3% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 29 | 44% |
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 28 September 2018.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Technology
#18,403
of 20,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,155
of 351,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Technology
#216
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,680 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.8. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 351,592 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 252 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.