↓ Skip to main content

Threatened species richness along a Himalayan elevational gradient: quantifying the influences of human population density, range size, and geometric constraints

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
Threatened species richness along a Himalayan elevational gradient: quantifying the influences of human population density, range size, and geometric constraints
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12898-018-0162-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Prakash Kumar Paudel, Jan Sipos, Jedediah F. Brodie

Abstract

A crucial step in conserving biodiversity is to identify the distributions of threatened species and the factors associated with species threat status. In the biodiversity hotspot of the Himalaya, very little is known about which locations harbour the highest diversity of threatened species and whether diversity of such species is related to area, mid-domain effects (MDE), range size, or human density. In this study, we assessed the drivers of variation in richness of threatened birds, mammals, reptiles, actinopterygii, and amphibians along an elevational gradient in Nepal Himalaya. Although geometric constraints (MDE), species range size, and human population density were significantly related to threatened species richness, the interaction between range size and human population density was of greater importance. Threatened species richness was positively associated with human population density and negatively associated with range size. In areas with high richness of threatened species, species ranges tend to be small. The preponderance of species at risk of extinction at low elevations in the subtropical biodiversity hotspot could be due to the double impact of smaller range sizes and higher human density.

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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 19%
Student > Master 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 14 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 31%
Environmental Science 17 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 15 26%
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 07 February 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2,929
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#282,552
of 446,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#40
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 446,427 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.