| Title |
Genes or Culture: Are Mitochondrial Genes Associated with Tool Use in Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops sp.)?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Genetics, June 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10519-010-9375-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
K. Bacher, S. Allen, A. K. Lindholm, L. Bejder, M. Krützen |
| Abstract |
Some bottlenose dolphins use marine sponges as foraging tools ('sponging'), which appears to be socially transmitted from mothers mainly to their female offspring. Yet, explanations alternative to social transmission have been proposed. Firstly, the propensity to engage in sponging might be due to differences in diving ability caused by variation of mitochondrial genes coding for proteins of the respiratory chain. Secondly, the cultural technique of sponging may have selected for changes in these same genes (or other autosomal ones) among its possessors. We tested whether sponging can be predicted by mitochondrial coding genes and whether these genes are under selection. In 29 spongers and 54 non-spongers from two study sites, the non-coding haplotype at the HVRI locus was a significant predictor of sponging, whereas the coding mitochondrial genes were not. There was no evidence of selection in the investigated genes. Our study shows that mitochondrial gene variation is unlikely to be a viable alternative to cultural transmission as a primary driver of tool use in dolphins. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 192 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 2% |
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 179 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 38 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 33 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 33 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 13% |
| Unknown | 25 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 115 | 60% |
| Environmental Science | 18 | 9% |
| Psychology | 10 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 7% |
| Unknown | 25 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 23 March 2019.
All research outputs
#7,482,726
of 22,873,031 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Genetics
#365
of 912 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,474
of 93,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Genetics
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,873,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 912 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 93,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.