↓ Skip to main content

The Effect of Mercury on Baseline Corticosterone in a Breeding Songbird

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
The Effect of Mercury on Baseline Corticosterone in a Breeding Songbird
Published in
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, December 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00128-014-1440-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah L. Maddux, Daniel A. Cristol, Claire W. Varian-Ramos, Eric L. Bradley

Abstract

Although songbirds accumulate mercury at rates equivalent to better-studied aquatic avian species, effects of mercury bioaccumulation in songbirds remain understudied. Little is known about the effects of mercury on endocrine physiology, but recent evidence indicates that mercury may disrupt the function of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Both field-based correlational studies and a recent dosing experiment suggest that mercury exposure alters levels of the primary avian stress hormone, CORT. We sampled zebra finches that had been dosed with 0, 0.5, or 1.0 ppm dietary methylmercury for baseline CORT twice; once during pairing and once after successfully fledging young. Circulating levels of CORT were not significantly affected by mercury exposure. However, our findings indicate potentially important differences in CORT responses between the sexes when exposed to environmentally relevant doses of mercury across the nesting cycle.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Professor 2 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 11 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 37%
Environmental Science 8 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Chemistry 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 13 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 February 2015.
All research outputs
#15,190,918
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#2,449
of 4,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,181
of 361,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#4
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,112 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 361,123 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.