| Title |
The end of the fat dodo? A new mass estimate for Raphus cucullatus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Science of Nature, January 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00114-010-0759-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Delphine Angst, Eric Buffetaut, Anick Abourachid |
| Abstract |
A new mass estimate for the dodo (Raphus cucullatus), based on the lengths of the femur, tibiotarsus and tarsometatarsus, is attempted. The obtained mean mass is 10.2 kg, which is less than previous estimates based on other methods, which ranged from 10.6 to 21.1 kg, and much lower than the 50 lbs reported by a seventeenth-century eyewitness. The new estimated mass, which is similar to that of a large wild turkey, seems more realistic than previous ones and supports the hypothesis that contemporary illustrations of extremely fat dodos were either exaggerations, or based on overfed specimens. Pictures of "fat" dodos may also have been based on individuals exhibiting a display behaviour with puffed out feathers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 3% |
| Romania | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Professor | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 22% |
| Unknown | 4 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 56% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 6 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 5 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 25 April 2023.
All research outputs
#2,455,887
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from The Science of Nature
#330
of 2,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,952
of 199,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Science of Nature
#5
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,195 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 199,995 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 70% of its contemporaries.