↓ Skip to main content

Respiration by buried echidnas Tachyglossus aculeatus

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Biology, March 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
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.
Title
Respiration by buried echidnas Tachyglossus aculeatus
Published in
Journal of Experimental Biology, March 2006
DOI 10.1242/jeb.02063
Pubmed ID
Authors

Courtney A. Waugh, Gordon C. Grigg, David T. Booth, Lyn A. Beard

Abstract

Short-beaked echidnas have an impressive ability to submerge completely into soil or sand and remain there, cryptic, for long periods. This poses questions about how they manage their respiration, cut off from a free flow of gases. We measured the gradient in oxygen partial pressure (PO2) away from the snouts of buried echidnas and oxygen consumption (VO2) in five individuals under similar conditions, in two substrates with different air-filled porosities (fa). A theoretical diffusion model indicated that diffusion alone was insufficient to account for the flux of oxygen required to meet measured rates of VO2. However, it was noticed that echidnas often showed periodic movements of the anterior part of the body, as if such movements were a deliberate effort to flush the tidal air space surrounding their nostrils. These ;flushing movements' were subsequently found to temporarily increase the levels of interstitial oxygen in the soil around the head region. Flushing movements were more frequent while VO2 was higher during the burrowing process, and also in substrate with lower fa. We conclude that oxygen supply to buried echidnas is maintained by diffusion through the soil augmented by periodic flushing movements, which ventilate the tidal airspace that surrounds the nostrils.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 13%
United States 1 6%
South Africa 1 6%
Poland 1 6%
Unknown 11 69%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 19%
Student > Master 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Other 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 6%
Design 1 6%
Unknown 5 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 09 August 2021.
All research outputs
#7,959,162
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Biology
#4,123
of 9,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,435
of 92,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Biology
#26
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,327 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 92,111 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.