| Title |
Identifying key ecosystem service providing areas to inform national-scale conservation planning
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Research Letters (ERL), January 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1088/1748-9326/abc121 |
| Authors |
Matthew G E Mitchell, Richard Schuster, Aerin L Jacob, Dalal E L Hanna, Camille Ouellet Dallaire, Ciara Raudsepp-Hearne, Elena M Bennett, Bernhard Lehner, Kai M A Chan |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 157 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 66 | 42% |
| United States | 13 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 3 | 2% |
| Djibouti | 2 | 1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Uganda | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Unknown | 57 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 100 | 64% |
| Scientists | 50 | 32% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 6 | 4% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 180 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 27 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 7% |
| Other | 27 | 15% |
| Unknown | 55 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 52 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 2% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 8% |
| Unknown | 75 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 451. 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 17 July 2022.
All research outputs
#58,829
of 24,799,506 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Research Letters (ERL)
#104
of 5,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,801
of 515,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Research Letters (ERL)
#5
of 256 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,799,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 51.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 515,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 256 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.