↓ Skip to main content

Prioritizing Avian Species for Their Risk of Population-Level Consequences from Wind Energy Development

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, March 2016
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
11 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 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
Prioritizing Avian Species for Their Risk of Population-Level Consequences from Wind Energy Development
Published in
PLoS ONE, March 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0150813
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie A. Beston, Jay E. Diffendorfer, Scott R. Loss, Douglas H. Johnson

Abstract

Recent growth in the wind energy industry has increased concerns about its impacts on wildlife populations. Direct impacts of wind energy include bird and bat collisions with turbines whereas indirect impacts include changes in wildlife habitat and behavior. Although many species may withstand these effects, species that are long-lived with low rates of reproduction, have specialized habitat preferences, or are attracted to turbines may be more prone to declines in population abundance. We developed a prioritization system to identify the avian species most likely to experience population declines from wind facilities based on their current conservation status and their expected risk from turbines. We developed 3 metrics of turbine risk that incorporate data on collision fatalities at wind facilities, population size, life history, species' distributions relative to turbine locations, number of suitable habitat types, and species' conservation status. We calculated at least 1 measure of turbine risk for 428 avian species that breed in the United States. We then simulated 100,000 random sets of cutoff criteria (i.e., the metric values used to assign species to different priority categories) for each turbine risk metric and for conservation status. For each set of criteria, we assigned each species a priority score and calculated the average priority score across all sets of criteria. Our prioritization system highlights both species that could potentially experience population decline caused by wind energy and species at low risk of population decline. For instance, several birds of prey, such as the long-eared owl, ferruginous hawk, Swainson's hawk, and golden eagle, were at relatively high risk of population decline across a wide variety of cutoff values, whereas many passerines were at relatively low risk of decline. This prioritization system is a first step that will help researchers, conservationists, managers, and industry target future study and management activity.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 101 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 30 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 16%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Other 12 11%
Student > Master 11 10%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 9 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 47 45%
Environmental Science 31 30%
Engineering 3 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 <1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 15 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 01 May 2018.
All research outputs
#1,174,742
of 15,694,055 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#17,565
of 156,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,298
of 267,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#627
of 5,388 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,694,055 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 156,174 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. 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 267,014 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,388 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.