↓ Skip to main content

Goal-dependent current compensation and drift in surf scoter flocks

Overview of attention for article published in Movement Ecology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 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
Goal-dependent current compensation and drift in surf scoter flocks
Published in
Movement Ecology, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40462-016-0068-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ryan Lukeman, Alexis Christie, Ronald C. Ydenberg

Abstract

Animals moving through air or water toward a goal frequently must contend with fluid currents, which can drift the actual path of the animal away from the direction of heading. Whether, and to what degree, animals compensate for currents depends on the species and environmental context, but plays an important role in the movement ecology of the species. In this paper, flocks of surf scoters (Melanitta perspicillata), an aquatic diving duck, were individually tracked during collective foraging in the presence of sideward water currents to assess the individual compensatory response while moving from open water toward the foraging location versus return to open water. During short-range movement toward the foraging location, surf scoters moved more slowly, and compensated for currents by orienting diagonally into the current to maintain a perpendicular track to the goal. In contrast, during return to open water, surf scoters moved faster, and maintained a perpendicular orientation away from the foraging location, and allowed the sideward current to drift their track diagonally. Surf scoters show a behavioural flexibility in response to currents, alternately using compensation and drift as the movement goal and consequent cost of accuracy change.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 10%
Unknown 9 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 20%
Professor 1 10%
Unspecified 1 10%
Student > Master 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Unknown 1 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 70%
Unspecified 1 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 10%
Unknown 1 10%
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 11 February 2016.
All research outputs
#12,825,663
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from Movement Ecology
#226
of 315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,683
of 397,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Movement Ecology
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.3. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 397,062 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.