↓ Skip to main content

Environment, host, and fungal traits predict continental-scale white-nose syndrome in bats

Overview of attention for article published in Science Advances, January 2016
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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
twitter
88 tweeters
facebook
9 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 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
Environment, host, and fungal traits predict continental-scale white-nose syndrome in bats
Published in
Science Advances, January 2016
DOI 10.1126/sciadv.1500831
Pubmed ID
Authors

David T. S. Hayman, Juliet R. C. Pulliam, Jonathan C. Marshall, Paul M. Cryan, Colleen T. Webb

Abstract

White-nose syndrome is a fungal disease killing bats in eastern North America, but disease is not seen in European bats and is less severe in some North American species. We show that how bats use energy during hibernation and fungal growth rates under different environmental conditions can explain how some bats are able to survive winter with infection and others are not. Our study shows how simple but nonlinear interactions between fungal growth and bat energetics result in decreased survival times at more humid hibernation sites; however, differences between species such as body size and metabolic rates determine the impact of fungal infection on bat survival, allowing European bat species to survive, whereas North American species can experience dramatic decline.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 88 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 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 4%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Hungary 1 <1%
Unknown 124 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 21%
Student > Master 27 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Other 8 6%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 15 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 69 51%
Environmental Science 17 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 3%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 23 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 141. 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 21 January 2020.
All research outputs
#153,891
of 16,578,610 outputs
Outputs from Science Advances
#1,123
of 5,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,154
of 346,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science Advances
#29
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,578,610 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,811 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 118.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 346,638 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 108 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 74% of its contemporaries.