| Title |
Ontogenetic variation in cold tolerance plasticity in Drosophila: is the Bogert effect bogus?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Science of Nature, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00114-013-1023-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katherine A. Mitchell, Brent J. Sinclair, John S. Terblanche |
| Abstract |
Ontogenetic variation in plasticity is important to understanding mechanisms and patterns of thermal tolerance variation. The Bogert effect postulates that, to compensate for their inability to behaviourally thermoregulate, less-mobile life stages of ectotherms are expected to show greater plasticity of thermal tolerance than more-mobile life stages. We test this general prediction by comparing plasticity of thermal tolerance (rapid cold-hardening, RCH) between mobile adults and less-mobile larvae of 16 Drosophila species. We find an RCH response in adults of 13 species but only in larvae of four species. Thus, the Bogert effect is not as widespread as expected. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| Poland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 59 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 27% |
| Researcher | 12 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 43 | 67% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 11 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 February 2013.
All research outputs
#19,201,293
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from The Science of Nature
#1,978
of 2,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,681
of 195,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Science of Nature
#12
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,195 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 195,457 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.