↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of two novel methods for counting wheat ears in the field with terrestrial LiDAR

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Methods, November 2023
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
1 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
Comparison of two novel methods for counting wheat ears in the field with terrestrial LiDAR
Published in
Plant Methods, November 2023
DOI 10.1186/s13007-023-01093-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yangyang Gu, Hongxu Ai, Tai Guo, Peng Liu, Yongqing Wang, Hengbiao Zheng, Tao Cheng, Yan Zhu, Weixing Cao, Xia Yao

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 1 100%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 100%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 November 2023.
All research outputs
#20,233,824
of 24,877,869 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#1,066
of 1,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,705
of 162,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#25
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,877,869 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,213 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% 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 162,374 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.