↓ Skip to main content

The hologenome concept: we need to incorporate function

Overview of attention for article published in Theory in Biosciences, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
The hologenome concept: we need to incorporate function
Published in
Theory in Biosciences, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12064-016-0240-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francesco Catania, Ulrich Krohs, Marco Chittò, Diana Ferro, Kevin Ferro, Gildas Lepennetier, Hans-Dieter Görtz, Rebecca S. Schreiber, Joachim Kurtz, Jürgen Gadau

Abstract

Are we in the midst of a paradigm change in biology and have animals and plants lost their individuality, i.e., are even so-called 'typical' organisms no longer organisms in their own right? Is the study of the holobiont-host plus its symbiotic microorganisms-no longer optional, but rather an obligatory path that must be taken for a comprehensive understanding of the ecology and evolution of the individual components that make up a holobiont? Or are associated microbes merely a component of their host's environment, and the holobiont concept is just a beautiful idea that does not add much or anything to our understanding of evolution? This article explores different aspects of the concept of the holobiont. We focus on the aspect of functional integration, a central holobiont property, which is only rarely considered thoroughly. We conclude that the holobiont comes in degrees, i.e., we regard the property of being a holobiont as a continuous trait that we term holobiontness, and that holobiontness is differentiated in several dimensions. Although the holobiont represents yet another level of selection (different from classical individual or group selection because it acts on a system that is composed of multiple species), it depends on the grade of functional integration whether or not the holobiont concept helps to cast light on the various degrees of interactions between symbiotic partners.

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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Other 4 7%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 10 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 17%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 12 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,866,607
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Theory in Biosciences
#125
of 200 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#259,679
of 423,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theory in Biosciences
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 200 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 423,627 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.