↓ Skip to main content

Is It Benign or Is It a Pariah? Empirical Evidence for the Impact of the Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis) on Australian Birds

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2012
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
26 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 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
Is It Benign or Is It a Pariah? Empirical Evidence for the Impact of the Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis) on Australian Birds
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0040622
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kate Grarock, Christopher R. Tidemann, Jeffrey Wood, David B. Lindenmayer

Abstract

There is widespread concern over the impact of introduced species on biodiversity, but the magnitude of these impacts can be variable. Understanding the impact of an introduced species is essential for effective management. However, empirical evidence of the impact of an introduced species can be difficult to obtain, especially when the impact is through competition. Change in species abundance is often slow and gradual, coinciding with environmental change. As a result, negative impacts on native species through competition are poorly documented. An example of the difficulties associated with obtaining empirical evidence of impact due to competition comes from work on the Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis). The species is listed in the World's top 100 worst invaders, despite a lack of empirical evidence of its negative impacts on native species. We assessed the impact of the Common Myna on native bird abundance, using long-term data both pre and post its invasion. At the outset of our investigation, we postulated that Common Myna establishment would negatively affect the abundance of other cavity-nesting species and bird species that are smaller than it. We found a negative relationship between the establishment of the Common Myna and the long-term abundance of three cavity-nesting species (Sulphur-crested Cockatoo, Crimson Rosella, Laughing Kookaburra) and eight small bird species (Striated Paradoxes, Rufous Whistler, Willie Wagtail, Grey Fantail, Magpie-lark, House Sparrow, Silvereye, Common Blackbird). To the best of our knowledge, this finding has never previously been demonstrated at the population level. We discuss the key elements of our success in finding empirical evidence of a species impact and the implications for prioritisation of introduced species for management. Specifically, prioritization of the Common Myna for management over other species still remains a contentious issue.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 6 5%
United States 2 2%
China 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 101 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Student > Master 10 9%
Other 8 7%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 54 49%
Environmental Science 27 24%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 18 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 22 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,181,403
of 25,905,864 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#14,928
of 225,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,190
of 178,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#202
of 3,942 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,905,864 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,989 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 178,789 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,942 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.