| Title |
Juvenile morphology in baleen whale phylogeny
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Science of Nature, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00114-014-1216-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cheng-Hsiu Tsai, R. Ewan Fordyce |
| Abstract |
Phylogenetic reconstructions are sensitive to the influence of ontogeny on morphology. Here, we use foetal/neonatal specimens of known species of living baleen whales (Cetacea: Mysticeti) to show how juvenile morphology of extant species affects phylogenetic placement of the species. In one clade (sei whale, Balaenopteridae), the juvenile is distant from the usual phylogenetic position of adults, but in the other clade (pygmy right whale, Cetotheriidae), the juvenile is close to the adult. Different heterochronic processes at work in the studied species have different influences on juvenile morphology and on phylogenetic placement. This study helps to understand the relationship between evolutionary processes and phylogenetic patterns in baleen whale evolution and, more in general, between phylogeny and ontogeny; likewise, this study provides a proxy how to interpret the phylogeny when fossils that are immature individuals are included. Juvenile individuals in the peramorphic acceleration clades would produce misleading phylogenies, whereas juvenile individuals in the paedomorphic neoteny clades should still provide reliable phylogenetic signals. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| France | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 2 | 4% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 40 | 85% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 17% |
| Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 5 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 51% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 11 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
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 30 January 2020.
All research outputs
#14,582,479
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from The Science of Nature
#1,797
of 2,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,867
of 231,086 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Science of Nature
#14
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,195 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 231,086 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.