↓ Skip to main content

Polyceraty (multi‐horns) in Damara sheep maps to ovine chromosome 2

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Genetics, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Polyceraty (multi‐horns) in Damara sheep maps to ovine chromosome 2
Published in
Animal Genetics, January 2016
DOI 10.1111/age.12411
Pubmed ID
Authors

O F C Greyvenstein, C M Reich, E van Marle-Koster, D G Riley, B J Hayes

Abstract

Polyceraty (presence of multiple horns) is rare in modern day ungulates. Although not found in wild sheep, polyceraty does occur in a small number of domestic sheep breeds covering a wide geographical region. Damara are fat-tailed hair sheep, from the south-western region of Africa, which display polyceraty, with horn number ranging from zero to four. We conducted a genome-wide association study for horn number with 43 Damara genotyped with 606 006 SNP markers. The analysis revealed a region with multiple significant SNPs on ovine chromosome 2, in a location different from the mutation for polled in sheep on chromosome 10. The causal mutation for polyceraty was not identified; however, the region associated with polyceraty spans nine HOXD genes, which are critical in embryonic development of appendages. Mutations in HOXD genes are implicated in polydactly phenotypes in mice and humans. There was no evidence for epistatic interactions contributing to polyceraty. This is the first report on the genetic mechanisms underlying polyceraty in the under-studied Damara.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 30%
Student > Master 4 20%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Professor 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 65%
Unspecified 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Environmental Science 1 5%
Unknown 4 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 January 2016.
All research outputs
#3,460,809
of 24,558,777 outputs
Outputs from Animal Genetics
#74
of 1,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,265
of 405,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Genetics
#8
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,558,777 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,291 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 405,794 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.