↓ Skip to main content

Has land use pushed terrestrial biodiversity beyond the planetary boundary? A global assessment

Overview of attention for article published in Science, July 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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
47 news outlets
blogs
12 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
769 tweeters
facebook
15 Facebook pages
googleplus
10 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
470 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Has land use pushed terrestrial biodiversity beyond the planetary boundary? A global assessment
Published in
Science, July 2016
DOI 10.1126/science.aaf2201
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tim Newbold, Lawrence N. Hudson, Andrew P. Arnell, Sara Contu, Adriana De Palma, Simon Ferrier, Samantha L. L. Hill, Andrew J. Hoskins, Igor Lysenko, Helen R. P. Phillips, Victoria J. Burton, Charlotte W. T. Chng, Susan Emerson, Di Gao, Gwilym Pask-Hale, Jon Hutton, Martin Jung, Katia Sanchez-Ortiz, Benno I. Simmons, Sarah Whitmee, Hanbin Zhang, Jörn P. W. Scharlemann, Andy Purvis, Newbold, Tim, Hudson, Lawrence N, Arnell, Andrew P, Contu, Sara, De Palma, Adriana, Ferrier, Simon, Hill, Samantha L L, Hoskins, Andrew J, Lysenko, Igor, Phillips, Helen R P, Burton, Victoria J, Chng, Charlotte W T, Emerson, Susan, Gao, Di, Pask-Hale, Gwilym, Hutton, Jon, Jung, Martin, Sanchez-Ortiz, Katia, Simmons, Benno I, Whitmee, Sarah, Zhang, Hanbin, Scharlemann, Jörn P W, Purvis, Andy, Newbold, T, Hudson, L, Arnell, AP, Contu, S, De Palma, A, Ferrier, S, Hill, SLL, Hoskins, AJ, Lysenko, I, Phillips, HRP, Burton, VJ, Chng, CWT, Emerson, S, Gao, D, Pask-Hale, G, and, J, Jung, M, Sanchez-Ortiz, K, Simmons, B, Whitmee, S, Zhang, H, Scharlemann, JPW, Purvis, A

Abstract

Land use and related pressures have reduced local terrestrial biodiversity, but it is unclear how the magnitude of change relates to the recently proposed planetary boundary ("safe limit"). We estimate that land use and related pressures have already reduced local biodiversity intactness--the average proportion of natural biodiversity remaining in local ecosystems--beyond its recently proposed planetary boundary across 58.1% of the world's land surface, where 71.4% of the human population live. Biodiversity intactness within most biomes (especially grassland biomes), most biodiversity hotspots, and even some wilderness areas is inferred to be beyond the boundary. Such widespread transgression of safe limits suggests that biodiversity loss, if unchecked, will undermine efforts toward long-term sustainable development.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 769 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 470 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 12 3%
United Kingdom 11 2%
Brazil 6 1%
France 5 1%
Australia 4 <1%
Spain 4 <1%
Switzerland 4 <1%
South Africa 3 <1%
Italy 3 <1%
Other 24 5%
Unknown 394 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 146 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 104 22%
Student > Master 53 11%
Student > Bachelor 31 7%
Other 26 6%
Other 110 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 188 40%
Environmental Science 181 39%
Unspecified 33 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 26 6%
Social Sciences 10 2%
Other 32 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 955. 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 15 December 2017.
All research outputs
#2,396
of 8,940,608 outputs
Outputs from Science
#137
of 43,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178
of 263,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#13
of 893 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,940,608 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 43,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.9. 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 263,987 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 893 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 98% of its contemporaries.