↓ Skip to main content

Worker honey bee ovary development: seasonal variation and the influence of larval and adult nutrition

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Comparative Physiology B, October 2005
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
88 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Worker honey bee ovary development: seasonal variation and the influence of larval and adult nutrition
Published in
Journal of Comparative Physiology B, October 2005
DOI 10.1007/s00360-005-0032-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shelley E. R. Hoover, Heather A. Higo, Mark L. Winston

Abstract

We examined the effect of larval and adult nutrition on worker honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) ovary development. Workers were fed high or low-pollen diets as larvae, and high or low-protein diets as adults. Workers fed low-protein diets at both life stages had the lowest levels of ovary development, followed by those fed high-protein diets as larvae and low- quality diets as adults, and then those fed diets poor in protein as larvae but high as adults. Workers fed high-protein diets at both life stages had the highest levels of ovary development. The increases in ovary development due to improved dietary protein in the larval and adult life stages were additive. Adult diet also had an effect on body mass. The results demonstrate that both carry-over of larval reserves and nutrients acquired in the adult life stage are important to ovary development in worker honey bees. Carry-over from larval development, however, appears to be less important to adult fecundity than is adult nutrition. Seasonal trends in worker ovary development and mass were examined throughout the brood rearing season. Worker ovary development was lowest in spring, highest in mid-summer, and intermediate in fall.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 120 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 19%
Researcher 21 17%
Student > Master 18 14%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 19 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 75 59%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 9%
Unspecified 6 5%
Environmental Science 3 2%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 23 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 August 2019.
All research outputs
#8,135,326
of 24,395,432 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology B
#236
of 840 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,570
of 60,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology B
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,395,432 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 840 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 60,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.