↓ Skip to main content

Energy integration between the solitary polyps of the clonal coral Lobophyllia corymbosa

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Biology, May 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
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.
Title
Energy integration between the solitary polyps of the clonal coral Lobophyllia corymbosa
Published in
Journal of Experimental Biology, May 2006
DOI 10.1242/jeb.02168
Pubmed ID
Authors

Itzchak Brickner, Uri Oren, Uri Frank, Yossi Loya

Abstract

Clonal integration in the coral Lobophyllia corymbosa was studied from two perspectives: transfer of carbon among clonemates and allorecognition. This coral forms colonies in the early post-metamorphic stages. In later ontogeny, the tissues interconnecting polyps die, transforming the colony into a clone of solitary polyps. These polyps continue to live in close proximity but without tissue continuity. Isolated polyps labeled with radioactive carbon in the light showed oriented transfer of assimilates towards adjacent, injured polyps. No significant transfer of carbon was observed towards intact, isogeneic polyps or allogeneic polyps. Grafting of coral tissues resulted in intra-clonal fusion, but only when polyps were previously sectioned. Allogeneic sectioned grafts were always rejected. Intact polyps were unresponsive towards isogeneic and allogeneic counterparts when grafted. Our results show that isolated Lobophyllia polyps not only recognize their clonemates as such, but also help them when necessary, although no tissue continuity exists between them.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Malaysia 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
Taiwan 1 2%
Unknown 43 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 24%
Researcher 9 18%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Student > Master 6 12%
Professor 3 6%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 3 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 73%
Environmental Science 4 8%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 3 6%
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 28 February 2013.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Biology
#4,483
of 9,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,843
of 83,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Biology
#23
of 44 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 9,327 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 83,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.