↓ Skip to main content

A Probability Co-Kriging Model to Account for Reporting Bias and Recognize Areas at High Risk for Zebra Mussels and Eurasian Watermilfoil Invasions in Minnesota

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
A Probability Co-Kriging Model to Account for Reporting Bias and Recognize Areas at High Risk for Zebra Mussels and Eurasian Watermilfoil Invasions in Minnesota
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2017.00231
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kaushi S. T. Kanankege, Moh A. Alkhamis, Nicholas B. D. Phelps, Andres M. Perez

Abstract

Zebra mussels (ZMs) (Dreissena polymorpha) and Eurasian watermilfoil (EWM) (Myriophyllum spicatum) are aggressive aquatic invasive species posing a conservation burden on Minnesota. Recognizing areas at high risk for invasion is a prerequisite for the implementation of risk-based prevention and mitigation management strategies. The early detection of invasion has been challenging, due in part to the imperfect observation process of invasions including the absence of a surveillance program, reliance on public reporting, and limited resource availability, which results in reporting bias. To predict the areas at high risk for invasions, while accounting for underreporting, we combined network analysis and probability co-kriging to estimate the risk of ZM and EWM invasions. We used network analysis to generate a waterbody-specific variable representing boater traffic, a known high risk activity for human-mediated transportation of invasive species. In addition, co-kriging was used to estimate the probability of species introduction, using waterbody-specific variables. A co-kriging model containing distance to the nearest ZM infested location, boater traffic, and road access was used to recognize the areas at high risk for ZM invasions (AUC = 0.78). The EWM co-kriging model included distance to the nearest EWM infested location, boater traffic, and connectivity to infested waterbodies (AUC = 0.76). Results suggested that, by 2015, nearly 20% of the waterbodies in Minnesota were at high risk of ZM (12.45%) or EWM (12.43%) invasions, whereas only 125/18,411 (0.67%) and 304/18,411 (1.65%) are currently infested, respectively. Prediction methods presented here can support decisions related to solving the problems of imperfect detection, which subsequently improve the early detection of biological invasions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Researcher 3 11%
Other 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 7 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 6 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Social Sciences 4 15%
Computer Science 2 7%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 6 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 September 2019.
All research outputs
#14,088,972
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#2,095
of 6,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,982
of 442,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#33
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,325 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 442,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.