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 |
Proximate effects of temperature versus evolved intrinsic constraints for embryonic development times among temperate and tropical songbirds
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41598-017-00885-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Riccardo Ton, Thomas E. Martin |
| Abstract |
The relative importance of intrinsic constraints imposed by evolved physiological trade-offs versus the proximate effects of temperature for interspecific variation in embryonic development time remains unclear. Understanding this distinction is important because slow development due to evolved trade-offs can yield phenotypic benefits, whereas slow development from low temperature can yield costs. We experimentally increased embryonic temperature in free-living tropical and north temperate songbird species to test these alternatives. Warmer temperatures consistently shortened development time without costs to embryo mass or metabolism. However, proximate effects of temperature played an increasingly stronger role than intrinsic constraints for development time among species with colder natural incubation temperatures. Long development times of tropical birds have been thought to primarily reflect evolved physiological trade-offs that facilitate their greater longevity. In contrast, our results indicate a much stronger role of temperature in embryonic development time than currently thought. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 25% |
| South Africa | 1 | 13% |
| Colombia | 1 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 4 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 4 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 23 | 55% |
| Environmental Science | 8 | 19% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 8 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 03 May 2017.
All research outputs
#6,288,833
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#42,625
of 123,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,431
of 310,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#1,496
of 4,226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 123,975 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 310,294 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 4,226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.