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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A comparison of behavioural (Landolt C) and anatomical estimates of visual acuity in archerfish (Toxotes chatareus)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Vision Research, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.visres.2013.02.014 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
S.E. Temple, D. Manietta, S.P. Collin |
| Abstract |
Archerfish forage by shooting jets of water at insects above the water's surface. The challenge of detecting small prey items against a complex background suggests that they have good visual acuity, but to date this has never been tested, despite archerfish becoming an increasingly important model species for vertebrate vision. We used a modified Landolt C test to measure visual acuity behaviourally, and compared the results to their predicted minimum separable angle based on both photoreceptor and ganglion cell spacing in the retina. Both measures yielded similar estimates of visual acuity; between 3.23 and 3.57 cycles per degree (0.155-0.140° of visual arc). Such a close match between behavioural and anatomical estimates of visual acuity in fishes is unusual and may be due to our use of an ecologically relevant task that measured the resolving power of the part of the retina that has the highest photoreceptor density and that is used in aligning their spitting angle with potential targets. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 41 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 24% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 23 | 51% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 2% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 22 March 2013.
All research outputs
#1,515,517
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Vision Research
#83
of 2,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,496
of 206,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vision Research
#3
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 2,497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 206,319 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.