Key to the Cassinia group
ASO Keyword Dashboard
Tracking 146 keywords for Key to the Cassinia group in Google Play
Key to the Cassinia group tracks 146 keywords (no keywords rank yet; 146 need traction). Key metrics: opportunity 71.2, difficulty 42.7.
Lucid key to the shrubby daisies Cassinia, Ozothamnus and their close relatives.
Tracked keywords
146
0 ranked • 146 not ranking yet
Top 10 coverage
—
Best rank — • Latest leader —
Avg opportunity
71.2
Top keyword: transparency
Avg difficulty
42.7
Lower scores indicate easier wins
Opportunity leaders
- 63.0
transparency
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 38.7 • Rank —
Competitors: 264
- 63.0
applied
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 41.9 • Rank —
Competitors: 432
- 62.6
bit
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 43.2 • Rank —
Competitors: 748
- 63.1
covered
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 39.9 • Rank —
Competitors: 461
- 61.9
communities
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 51.3 • Rank —
Competitors: 187
Unranked opportunities
transparency
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 38.7 • Competitors: 264
applied
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 41.9 • Competitors: 432
bit
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 43.2 • Competitors: 748
covered
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 39.9 • Competitors: 461
communities
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 51.3 • Competitors: 187
High competition keywords
access
Total apps: 333,757 • Major competitors: 12,342
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 58.5
find
Total apps: 302,834 • Major competitors: 17,561
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 58.5
mobile
Total apps: 280,245 • Major competitors: 11,030
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 55.7
information
Total apps: 264,413 • Major competitors: 8,150
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 54.8
using
Total apps: 224,577 • Major competitors: 12,356
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 57.0
All tracked keywords
Includes opportunity, difficulty, rankings and competitor benchmarks
| Major Competitors | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| character | 72 | 100 | 47 | 70 23,789 competing apps Median installs: 8,248 Avg rating: 2.7 | — | — | 2,285 major competitor apps |
| whether | 66 | 100 | 53 | 84 195,103 competing apps Median installs: 952 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 7,851 major competitor apps |
| particularly | 73 | 100 | 36 | 58 4,494 competing apps Median installs: 1,892 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 122 major competitor apps |
| scientist | 70 | 100 | 32 | 45 629 competing apps Median installs: 3,528 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 56 major competitor apps |
| information | 65 | 100 | 55 | 86 264,413 competing apps Median installs: 1,196 Avg rating: 2.2 | — | — | 8,150 major competitor apps |
| used | 68 | 100 | 55 | 81 117,205 competing apps Median installs: 3,092 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 5,232 major competitor apps |
| transparency | 74 | 100 | 39 | 63 8,934 competing apps Median installs: 569 Avg rating: 2.2 | — | — | 264 major competitor apps |
| created | 70 | 100 | 48 | 76 56,417 competing apps Median installs: 1,946 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 2,203 major competitor apps |
| list | 69 | 100 | 52 | 78 81,771 competing apps Median installs: 2,565 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 3,558 major competitor apps |
| using | 66 | 100 | 57 | 85 224,577 competing apps Median installs: 2,832 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 12,356 major competitor apps |
| find | 65 | 100 | 58 | 87 302,834 competing apps Median installs: 2,786 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 17,561 major competitor apps |
| available | 66 | 100 | 58 | 84 194,534 competing apps Median installs: 2,770 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 10,380 major competitor apps |
| mobile | 65 | 100 | 56 | 87 280,245 competing apps Median installs: 1,393 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 11,030 major competitor apps |
| key | 68 | 100 | 52 | 81 113,460 competing apps Median installs: 1,424 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 5,639 major competitor apps |
| note | 71 | 100 | 48 | 72 31,554 competing apps Median installs: 4,259 Avg rating: 2.7 | — | — | 1,672 major competitor apps |
| de | 73 | 100 | 43 | 68 17,616 competing apps Median installs: 1,572 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 697 major competitor apps |
| visit | 70 | 100 | 51 | 75 52,696 competing apps Median installs: 2,171 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 2,931 major competitor apps |
| group | 70 | 100 | 53 | 75 47,493 competing apps Median installs: 1,395 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 1,866 major competitor apps |
| small | 70 | 100 | 49 | 76 56,437 competing apps Median installs: 2,177 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 2,887 major competitor apps |
| access | 65 | 100 | 59 | 88 333,757 competing apps Median installs: 1,158 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 12,342 major competitor apps |
| helping | 71 | 100 | 45 | 73 36,534 competing apps Median installs: 982 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 1,240 major competitor apps |
| quickly | 68 | 100 | 57 | 81 120,089 competing apps Median installs: 1,278 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 5,241 major competitor apps |
| moment | 71 | 100 | 47 | 71 30,496 competing apps Median installs: 1,893 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 1,603 major competitor apps |
| provides | 67 | 100 | 54 | 83 167,241 competing apps Median installs: 1,409 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 5,649 major competitor apps |
| part | 69 | 100 | 53 | 77 68,188 competing apps Median installs: 1,810 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 3,236 major competitor apps |
App Description
Lucid key to the shrubby daisies Cassinia, Ozothamnus and their close relatives.
The key does not cover two hybrids; Cassinia x adunca is considered to be a hybrid of and intermediate between C. complanata and C. tegulata, and Ozothamnus x expansifolius is a name for any presumed hybrid of O. hookeri regardless of the other parent and thus not a natural unit. Also not covered at this moment are the three informal phrase name taxa Ozothamnus sp. Boonoo Boonoo, O. sp. Ebor Falls, and O. sp. Mt Tomah.
The key was produced by CSIRO scientist Alexander Schmidt-Lebuhn and Kirsten Cowley at the Australian National Herbarium (CANB) through funding from the Bush Blitz Applied Taxonomy grant scheme. We would be grateful if mistakes or other feedback were communicated to the first author.
The following characters may be particularly useful for quickly narrowing down the possibilities during identification: capitulescence size, capitulescence structure, leaf dimensions, leaf shape, indumentum (hairs) of young leaves and stems, flowering head dimensions, whether involucral bracts are straight or radiating, and, in particular for smaller flowering heads, the number of flowers per head. (Note that leaf hairs refer to the surfaces, that is excepting hair types found only in the mid-rib groove on the upper side of young leaves.) Colour, texture or transparency of involucral bracts are somewhat more subjective and should be used with care, as their interpretation may differ a bit from person to person.
The key is deliberately written to minimise the use of technical terms. All morphological characters are illustrated, species are illustrated and have distribution maps, and the key provides species profiles and links to the Atlas of Living Australia. Below the character list the user will find options for taxonomic or geographic subselection, allowing for example to restrict the key to Tasmanian Ozothamnus, if so desired.
We are grateful to Anthony Orchard for lending his expertise on Cassinia to this project; Nunzio Knerr for helping with the generation of distribution maps; Miguel de Salas for helpful discussions on the distribution of several species in Tasmania; the herbaria AD, BRI, HO, NE, NSW, and PERTH for making available specimens for study; and Parks Australia for funding through the Bush Blitz Applied Taxonomy grant scheme. Bush Blitz is a partnership between the Australian Government, BHP Billiton Sustainable Communities and Earthwatch Institute.
This app was created using the Lucid Mobile platform, part of the Lucid suite of tools. If you are interested in creating a similar app, or for further information on creating interactive keys, please visit http://www.lucidcentral.org
