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 |
Inefficient star formation in extremely metal poor galaxies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nature13820 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yong Shi, Lee Armus, George Helou, Sabrina Stierwalt, Yu Gao, Junzhi Wang, Zhi-Yu Zhang, Qiusheng Gu |
| Abstract |
The first galaxies contain stars born out of gas with few or no 'metals' (that is, elements heavier than helium). The lack of metals is expected to inhibit efficient gas cooling and star formation, but this effect has yet to be observed in galaxies with an oxygen abundance (relative to hydrogen) below a tenth of that of the Sun. Extremely metal poor nearby galaxies may be our best local laboratories for studying in detail the conditions that prevailed in low metallicity galaxies at early epochs. Carbon monoxide emission is unreliable as a tracer of gas at low metallicities, and while dust has been used to trace gas in low-metallicity galaxies, low spatial resolution in the far-infrared has typically led to large uncertainties. Here we report spatially resolved infrared observations of two galaxies with oxygen abundances below ten per cent of the solar value, and show that stars formed very inefficiently in seven star-forming clumps in these galaxies. The efficiencies are less than a tenth of those found in normal, metal rich galaxies today, suggesting that star formation may have been very inefficient in the early Universe. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 1 | 8% |
| Finland | 1 | 8% |
| Puerto Rico | 1 | 8% |
| Australia | 1 | 8% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 83% |
| Scientists | 2 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 4% |
| China | 3 | 4% |
| Italy | 2 | 3% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 87% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 41% |
| Researcher | 16 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Physics and Astronomy | 64 | 81% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 1% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 1% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 122. 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 23 October 2014.
All research outputs
#347,286
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#18,050
of 98,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,356
of 268,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#297
of 1,076 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 98,339 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 268,506 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,076 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 72% of its contemporaries.