↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of available anatomical characters for linking living mammals to fossil taxa in phylogenetic analyses

Overview of attention for article published in Biology Letters, May 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 (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
32 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Assessment of available anatomical characters for linking living mammals to fossil taxa in phylogenetic analyses
Published in
Biology Letters, May 2016
DOI 10.1098/rsbl.2015.1003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Guillerme, Natalie Cooper

Abstract

Analyses of living and fossil taxa are crucial for understanding biodiversity through time. The total evidence method allows living and fossil taxa to be combined in phylogenies, using molecular data for living taxa and morphological data for living and fossil taxa. With this method, substantial overlap of coded anatomical characters among living and fossil taxa is vital for accurately inferring topology. However, although molecular data for living species are widely available, scientists generating morphological data mainly focus on fossils. Therefore, there are fewer coded anatomical characters in living taxa, even in well-studied groups such as mammals. We investigated the number of coded anatomical characters available in phylogenetic matrices for living mammals and how these were phylogenetically distributed across orders. Eleven of 28 mammalian orders have less than 25% species with available characters; this has implications for the accurate placement of fossils, although the issue is less pronounced at higher taxonomic levels. In most orders, species with available characters are randomly distributed across the phylogeny, which may reduce the impact of the problem. We suggest that increased morphological data collection efforts for living taxa are needed to produce accurate total evidence phylogenies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 X users 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Czechia 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 40 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 25%
Researcher 11 25%
Student > Master 8 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 64%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 8 18%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 06 August 2016.
All research outputs
#1,616,746
of 25,722,279 outputs
Outputs from Biology Letters
#1,309
of 3,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,092
of 312,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Letters
#31
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,722,279 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,436 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 58.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 312,706 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 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 57% of its contemporaries.