The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Fossils reject climate change as the cause of extinction of Caribbean bats
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep07971 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. Angel Soto-Centeno, David W. Steadman |
| Abstract |
We combined novel radiocarbon dates of bat fossils with time-scaled ecological niche models (ENM) to study bat extinctions in the Caribbean. Radiocarbon-dated fossils show that late Quaternary losses of bat populations took place during the late Holocene (<4 ka) rather than late Pleistocene (>10 ka). All bat radiocarbon dates from Abaco (Bahamas) that represent extirpated populations are younger than 4 ka. We include data on six bat species, three of which are Caribbean endemics, and include nectarivores as well as insectivores. Climate-based ENMs from the Last Glacial Maximum to the present reflect overall stability in distributions, with suitable climatic habitat being present over time. In the absence of radiocarbon dates, bat extinctions had been presumed to take place during the last glacial-interglacial transition (ca. 10 ka). Now we see that extirpation of bats on these tropical islands is more complex than previously thought and primarily postdates the major climate changes that took place during the late Pleistocene-Holocene transition. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 32% |
| United States | 4 | 21% |
| Australia | 2 | 11% |
| Belgium | 1 | 5% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| Mexico | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 21% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 68% |
| Scientists | 5 | 26% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Romania | 1 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 62 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 21% |
| Researcher | 14 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 29 | 41% |
| Environmental Science | 11 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 9% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 February 2015.
All research outputs
#1,278,274
of 25,537,395 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#12,633
of 141,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,127
of 360,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#91
of 1,112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,537,395 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 141,606 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 360,518 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,112 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.