Emergence of healing in the Antarctic ozone layer

Overview of attention for article published in Science, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#15 of 39,452)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
245 news outlets
blogs
20 blogs
twitter
223 tweeters
facebook
40 Facebook pages
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor
video
3 video uploaders

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
Title
Emergence of healing in the Antarctic ozone layer
Published in
Science, June 2016
DOI 10.1126/science.aae0061
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan Solomon, Diane J. Ivy, Doug Kinnison, Michael J. Mills, Ryan R. Neely, Anja Schmidt, Solomon, Susan, Ivy, Diane J, Kinnison, Doug, Mills, Michael J, Neely, Ryan R, Schmidt, Anja, Solomon, S, Ivy, DJ, Kinnison, D, Mills, MJ, Neely III, RR, Schmidt, A

Abstract

Industrial chlorofluorocarbons that cause ozone depletion have been phased out under the Montreal Protocol. A chemically-driven increase in polar ozone (or "healing") is expected in response to this historic agreement. Observations and model calculations taken together indicate that the onset of healing of Antarctic ozone loss has now emerged in September. Fingerprints of September healing since 2000 are identified through (i) increases in ozone column amounts, (ii) changes in the vertical profile of ozone concentration, and (iii) decreases in the areal extent of the ozone hole. Along with chemistry, dynamical and temperature changes contribute to the healing, but could represent feedbacks to chemistry. Volcanic eruptions episodically interfere with healing, particularly during 2015 (when a record October ozone hole occurred following the Calbuco eruption).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 223 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 66 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Researcher 4 6%
Unspecified 2 3%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 45 65%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 8 12%
Environmental Science 7 10%
Physics and Astronomy 3 4%
Unspecified 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 45 65%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2263. 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 April 2017.
All research outputs
#174
of 7,564,878 outputs
Outputs from Science
#15
of 39,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12
of 256,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#3
of 925 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,564,878 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 39,452 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 256,672 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 925 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 99% of its contemporaries.