↓ Skip to main content

Australia’s arid-adapted butcherbirds experienced range expansions during Pleistocene glacial maxima

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Australia’s arid-adapted butcherbirds experienced range expansions during Pleistocene glacial maxima
Published in
Nature Communications, May 2014
DOI 10.1038/ncomms4994
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna M. Kearns, Leo Joseph, Alicia Toon, Lyn G. Cook

Abstract

A model of range expansions during glacial maxima (GM) for cold-adapted species is generally accepted for the Northern Hemisphere. Given that GM in Australia largely resulted in the expansion of arid zones, rather than glaciation, it could be expected that arid-adapted species might have had expanded ranges at GM, as cold-adapted species did in the Northern Hemisphere. For Australian biota, however, it remains paradigmatic that arid-adapted species contracted to refugia at GM. Here we use multilocus data and ecological niche models (ENMs) to test alternative GM models for butcherbirds. ENMs, mtDNA and estimates of nuclear introgression and past population sizes support a model of GM expansion in the arid-tolerant Grey Butcherbird that resulted in secondary contact with its close relative-the savanna-inhabiting Silver-backed Butcherbird-whose contemporary distribution is widely separated. Together, these data reject the universal use of a GM contraction model for Australia's dry woodland and arid biota.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 70 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 28%
Researcher 16 21%
Student > Master 13 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 5 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 49 65%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 11%
Environmental Science 6 8%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 6 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 06 October 2023.
All research outputs
#5,707,840
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#33,271
of 46,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,450
of 226,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#418
of 647 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 46,862 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.5. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 226,629 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 647 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.