↓ Skip to main content

THE ROLE OF GRAVITY IN THE EVOLUTION OF MAMMALIAN BLOOD PRESSURE

Overview of attention for article published in Evolution, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
THE ROLE OF GRAVITY IN THE EVOLUTION OF MAMMALIAN BLOOD PRESSURE
Published in
Evolution, January 2014
DOI 10.1111/evo.12298
Pubmed ID
Authors

Craig R. White, Roger S. Seymour

Abstract

Understanding of the factors involved in determining the level of central arterial blood pressure in mammals has been clouded by inappropriate allometric analyses that fail to account for phylogenetic relationships among species, and require pressure to approach 0 as body size decreases. The present study analyses systolic, mean arterial, and diastolic blood pressure in 47 species of mammal with phylogenetically informed techniques applied to two-parameter equations. It also sets nonlinear, three-parameter equations to the data to remove the assumption of the two-parameter power equation that the smallest animals must have negligible blood pressure. These analyses show that blood pressure increases with body size. Nonlinear analyses show that mean blood pressure increases from 93 mmHg in a 10 g mouse to 156 mmHg in a 4 tonne elephant. The scaling exponent of blood pressure is generally lower than, though not significantly different from, the exponent predicted on the basis of the expected scaling of the vertical distance between the head and the heart. This indicates that compensation for the vertical distance above the heart is not perfect and suggests that the pressure required to perfuse the capillaries at the top of the body may decrease in larger species.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 45 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 23%
Researcher 8 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 15%
Student > Master 4 8%
Professor 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 9 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Physics and Astronomy 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 9 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 02 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,168,167
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Evolution
#4,596
of 5,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,711
of 319,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolution
#28
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,878 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 319,336 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.