↓ Skip to main content

Testing the inhibitory cascade model in Mesozoic and Cenozoic mammaliaforms

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 X users
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
Testing the inhibitory cascade model in Mesozoic and Cenozoic mammaliaforms
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-13-79
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas JD Halliday, Anjali Goswami

Abstract

Much of the current research in the growing field of evolutionary development concerns relating developmental pathways to large-scale patterns of morphological evolution, with developmental constraints on variation, and hence diversity, a field of particular interest. Tooth morphology offers an excellent model system for such 'evo-devo' studies, because teeth are well preserved in the fossil record, and are commonly used in phylogenetic analyses and as ecological proxies. Moreover, tooth development is relatively well studied, and has provided several testable hypotheses of developmental influences on macroevolutionary patterns. The recently-described Inhibitory Cascade (IC) Model provides just such a hypothesis for mammalian lower molar evolution. Derived from experimental data, the IC Model suggests that a balance between mesenchymal activators and molar-derived inhibitors determines the size of the immediately posterior molar, predicting firstly that molars either decrease in size along the tooth row, or increase in size, or are all of equal size, and secondly that the second lower molar should occupy one third of lower molar area. Here, we tested the IC Model in a large selection of taxa from diverse extant and fossil mammalian groups, ranging from the Middle Jurassic (~176 to 161 Ma) to the Recent.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 2%
Unknown 59 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Professor 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 16 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 35%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 9 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Unspecified 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 17 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 21 February 2023.
All research outputs
#2,190,714
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#549
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,920
of 212,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#11
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 212,289 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.