↓ Skip to main content

Evidence of an extreme weather‐induced phenological mismatch and a local extirpation of the endangered Karner blue butterfly

Overview of attention for article published in Conservation Science and Practice, December 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Evidence of an extreme weather‐induced phenological mismatch and a local extirpation of the endangered Karner blue butterfly
Published in
Conservation Science and Practice, December 2019
DOI 10.1111/csp2.147
Authors

Tamatha A. Patterson, Ralph Grundel, Jason D. K. Dzurisin, Randy L. Knutson, Jessica J. Hellmann

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 5 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 48%
Environmental Science 5 22%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 4%
Unknown 6 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 10 February 2020.
All research outputs
#3,993,736
of 16,908,873 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Science and Practice
#212
of 352 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,778
of 393,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Science and Practice
#17
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,908,873 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 352 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 393,725 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.