The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Cumulative Impacts of Oil Fields on Northern Alaskan Landscapes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science, November 1987
|
| DOI | 10.1126/science.238.4828.757 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
D. A. Walker, P. J. Webber, E. F. Binnian, K. R. Everett, N. D. Lederer, E. A. Nordstrand, M. D. Walker |
| Abstract |
Proposed further developments on Alaska's Arctic Coastal Plain raise questions about cumulative effects on arctic tundra ecosystems of development of multiple large oil fields. Maps of historical changes to the Prudhoe Bay Oil Field show indirect impacts can lag behind planned developments by many years and the total area eventually disturbed can greatly exceed the planned area of construction. For example, in the wettest parts of the oil field (flat thaw-lake plains), flooding and thermokarst covered more than twice the area directly affected by roads and other construction activities. Protecting critical wildlife habitat is the central issue for cumulative impact analysis in northern Alaska. Comprehensive landscape planning with the use of geographic information system technology and detailed geobotanical maps can help identify and protect areas of high wildlife use. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Norway | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Russia | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 30% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 11 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 22 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 27% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 19 July 2021.
All research outputs
#2,416,600
of 26,063,110 outputs
Outputs from Science
#30,689
of 83,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#333
of 11,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#12
of 162 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,063,110 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83,633 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 11,947 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 162 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 91% of its contemporaries.