↓ Skip to main content

Phylogenetic biome conservatism on a global scale

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, February 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
577 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1259 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Phylogenetic biome conservatism on a global scale
Published in
Nature, February 2009
DOI 10.1038/nature07764
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael D. Crisp, Mary T. K. Arroyo, Lyn G. Cook, Maria A. Gandolfo, Gregory J. Jordan, Matt S. McGlone, Peter H. Weston, Mark Westoby, Peter Wilf, H. Peter Linder

Abstract

How and why organisms are distributed as they are has long intrigued evolutionary biologists. The tendency for species to retain their ancestral ecology has been demonstrated in distributions on local and regional scales, but the extent of ecological conservatism over tens of millions of years and across continents has not been assessed. Here we show that biome stasis at speciation has outweighed biome shifts by a ratio of more than 25:1, by inferring ancestral biomes for an ecologically diverse sample of more than 11,000 plant species from around the Southern Hemisphere. Stasis was also prevalent in transocean colonizations. Availability of a suitable biome could have substantially influenced which lineages establish on more than one landmass, in addition to the influence of the rarity of the dispersal events themselves. Conversely, the taxonomic composition of biomes has probably been strongly influenced by the rarity of species' transitions between biomes. This study has implications for the future because if clades have inherently limited capacity to shift biomes, then their evolutionary potential could be strongly compromised by biome contraction as climate changes.

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 1,259 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 42 3%
United States 22 2%
United Kingdom 11 <1%
South Africa 9 <1%
Switzerland 8 <1%
Germany 8 <1%
France 8 <1%
Chile 7 <1%
Colombia 5 <1%
Other 42 3%
Unknown 1097 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 271 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 259 21%
Student > Master 163 13%
Student > Bachelor 123 10%
Student > Postgraduate 74 6%
Other 259 21%
Unknown 110 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 771 61%
Environmental Science 201 16%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 65 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 39 3%
Social Sciences 8 <1%
Other 32 3%
Unknown 143 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 July 2022.
All research outputs
#14,278,154
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#83,326
of 91,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,017
of 186,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#501
of 571 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 91,102 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 99.4. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 186,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 571 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.