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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Blow me down: A new perspective on Aloe dichotoma mortality from windthrow
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ecology and Evolution, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6785-14-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Samuel Linton Jack, Michael Timm Hoffman, Rick Frederick Rohde, Ian Durbach, Margaret Archibald |
| Abstract |
Windthrow, the uprooting of trees during storms associated with strong winds, is a well-established cause of mortality in temperate regions of the world, often with large ecological consequences. However, this phenomenon has received little attention within arid regions and is not well documented in southern Africa. Slow rates of post-disturbance recovery and projected increases in extreme weather events in arid areas mean that windthrow could be more common and have bigger impacts on these ecosystems in the future. This is of concern due to slow rates of post-disturbance recovery in arid systems and projected increases in extreme weather events in these areas. This study investigated the spatial pattern, magnitude and likely causes of windthrown mortality in relation to other forms of mortality in Aloe dichotoma, an iconic arid-adapted arborescent succulent and southern Africa climate change indicator species. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 65 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 19% |
| Researcher | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 12% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 14 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 18 | 27% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 24% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 16 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 07 June 2016.
All research outputs
#4,205,409
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1,056
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,443
of 249,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#16
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 249,075 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.