| Title |
Phylogeography of crossbills, bullfinches, grosbeaks, and rosefinches
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, July 2001
|
| DOI | 10.1007/pl00000930 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Arnaiz-Villena, J. Guillén, V. Ruiz-del-Valle, E. Lowy, J. Zamora, P. Varela, D. Stefani, L.M. Allende |
| Abstract |
Mitochondrial cytochrome b (cyt b) from 24 Carduelini species including crossbills, bullfinches, grosbeaks, rosefinches, and other related, but not conclusively classified species, was sequenced. These sequences were also compared with all the available sequences from the genera Carduelis, Serinus, and Passer. Phylogenetic analyses consistently gave the same groups of finches and the calculated divergence times suggest that speciation of the studied species occurred between 14 and 3 million years ago (Miocene-Pliocene), appearing before the Passer, Carduelis, and Serinus genera. Pleistocene glaciations may have been important in sub-speciation. Crossbills are integrated within the genus Carduelis, and within redpolls; the common crossbill shows subspeciation with Loxia japonica in the Pleistocene epoch. Pinicola enucleator groups together with bullfinches and is probably the ancestor of the group. Hawfinch is only distantly related to the studied groups, and might either represent an isolated genus or be related to the New World genus Hesperiphona. The grosbeak genera Eophona and Mycerobas are clearly sister groups, and species belonging to the former might have given rise to Mycerobas species. The isolated (in classification) Uragus sibiricus and Haematospiza sipahi are included within the genus Carpodacus (rosefinches); Carpodacus nipalensis is outside the genus Carpodacus in the molecular analyses and might be an isolated species or related to the genus Montifringilla. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 2 | 3% |
| Uruguay | 2 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Lithuania | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 63 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 20% |
| Researcher | 13 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 20% |
| Unknown | 6 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 47 | 67% |
| Environmental Science | 6 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 7% |
| Psychology | 1 | 1% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 8 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 April 2024.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#2,145
of 5,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,991
of 40,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#12
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,876 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 40,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.