↓ Skip to main content

134Cs and 137Cs levels in a grassland, 32 km northwest of the Fukushima 1 Nuclear Power Plant, measured for two seasons after the fallout

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Plant Research, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#49 of 458)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
Title
134Cs and 137Cs levels in a grassland, 32 km northwest of the Fukushima 1 Nuclear Power Plant, measured for two seasons after the fallout
Published in
Journal of Plant Research, December 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10265-013-0608-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ichiro Terashima, Masae Shiyomi, Hiroo Fukuda

Abstract

We measured the levels of radioactive caesium (RACs; ¹³⁴Cs and ¹³⁷Cs) in plants and soil in a grassland, 32 km northwest of the Fukushima 1 Nuclear Power Plant, from June 2011 to October 2012. In 2011, the highest RACs levels (¹³⁴Cs + ¹³⁷Cs) in plants and in the 0-5 cm soil layer were approximately 80 kBq per kg dry weight (DW). Forage grasses and clovers in this grassland showed similar RACs levels. On a DW basis, the levels of RACs in these plants tended to increase with increasing biomass over both years, but the absolute levels decreased in 2012. The RACs levels in the soil decreased sharply with soil depth; the RACs level in the 5-10 cm soil layer was only 3 % of that in the 0-5 cm layer. The transfer factor (ratio of radioactivity in plant parts on DW basis to that in the 0-10 cm soil layer) was 0.5 and 1.0 for the aboveground and belowground plant parts, respectively, in 2011, and these values decreased by approximately 50 % in 2012. We discuss the possible mechanisms underlying these trends, and strategies to decrease the level of RACs in plants to the permissible level for forage.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 9%
Unknown 10 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 27%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 18%
Student > Master 2 18%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 64%
Environmental Science 4 36%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 24 December 2013.
All research outputs
#3,093,821
of 13,384,857 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Plant Research
#49
of 458 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,345
of 252,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Plant Research
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,384,857 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 458 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 252,715 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.