| Title |
Distribution of Assamese macaques (Macaca assamensis) in the Inner Himalayan region of Bhutan and their mtDNA diversity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Primates, May 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10329-006-0192-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yoshi Kawamoto, Mitsuru Aimi, Tashi Wangchuk, Sherub |
| Abstract |
The distributions of Assamese macaques (Macaca assamensis) and rhesus macaques (M. mulatta) in Bhutan have been only partially documented. In order to investigate the distribution patterns of these species, we conducted field observation and genetic assessment with mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) typing of macaques in the Inner Himalayas of Bhutan. There were 24 sightings of macaque groups, and all were visually identified as Assamese macaques. No groups of rhesus macaques were sighted in this survey area, in contrast with the survey results in the Nepalese Himalayas. Molecular phylogenetic analysis revealed that the Bhutan macaques are closer in proximity to their counterparts in the Indo-Chinese region (Thailand and Laos) than to rhesus macaques in China, Laos and India. However, clustering results suggested the marked differentiation of the macaques in Bhutan from the Assamese macaques in Indo-China. We tentatively conclude that the macaques of the Inner Himalayan regions in Bhutan are Assamese macaques and that they appear to be of a lineage distinct from Assamese macaques in the Indo-Chinese region (subspecies M. a. assamensis). The degree of mtDNA diversity suggests that the Assamese macaques in Bhutan are of a more ancient ancestry than M. a. assamensis, thereby supporting the speciation hypothesis of the expansion of a sinica-group of macaques from South Asia to Southeast and then to East Asia (Fooden; Fieldiana Zool 45:1-44, 1988). Assignment of Assamese macaques in Bhutan to M. a. pelops is premature due to the lack of molecular data and recent taxonomic controversy. The mtDNA diversity of Assamese macaques was greater than that of rhesus macaques, suggesting the earlier speciation of Assamese macaques. The significance of the ecogeographic segregation model of macaque distribution is discussed in relation to the evolutionary range expansion into the Himalayan regions in South Asia. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 35% |
| Researcher | 8 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 12% |
| Professor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 56% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 5 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 20 October 2011.
All research outputs
#2,917,449
of 22,655,397 outputs
Outputs from Primates
#210
of 1,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,160
of 65,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Primates
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,655,397 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,012 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 65,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them