↓ Skip to main content

Correspondence between the habitat of the threatened pudú (Cervidae) and the national protected-area system of Chile

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2016
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
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Correspondence between the habitat of the threatened pudú (Cervidae) and the national protected-area system of Chile
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12898-015-0055-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melissa Pavez-Fox, Sergio A. Estay

Abstract

Currently, many species are facing serious conservation problems due to habitat loss. The impact of the potential loss of biodiversity associated with habitat loss is difficult to measure. This is particularly the case with inconspicuous species such as the threatened pudú (Pudu puda), an endemic Cervidae of temperate forests of Chile and Argentina. To evaluate the effectiveness of the Chilean protected-area system in protecting the habitat of the pudú, we measured the congruence between this specie's potential distribution and the geographical area occupied by the protected areas in central and southern Chile. The measurements of congruency were made using the Maxent modeling method. The potential habitat of the pudú was found to be poorly represented in the system (3-8 %) and even the most suitable areas for the species are not currenly protected. According to these results, the protected area network cannot be considered as a key component of the conservation strategy for this species. The results presented here also serve as a guide for the reevaluation of current pudú conservation strategies, for the design of new field studies to detect the presence of this species in human-disturbed areas or remaining patches of native forest, and for the implementation of corridors to maximize the success of conservation efforts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 20%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Professor 4 6%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 12 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 37%
Environmental Science 15 21%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 6%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 16 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 23 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,784,639
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2,477
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,754
of 400,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#43
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 400,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.