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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Molecular evidence for the common origin of snap‐traps among carnivorous plants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
American Journal of Botany, September 2002
|
| DOI | 10.3732/ajb.89.9.1503 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kenneth M. Cameron, Kenneth J. Wurdack, Richard W. Jobson |
| Abstract |
The snap-trap leaves of the aquatic waterwheel plant (Aldrovanda) resemble those of Venus' flytrap (Dionaea), its distribution and habit are reminiscent of bladderworts (Utricularia), but it shares many reproductive characters with sundews (Drosera). Moreover, Aldrovanda has never been included in molecular phylogenetic studies, so it has been unclear whether snap-traps evolved only once or more than once among angiosperms. Using sequences from nuclear 18S and plastid rbcL, atpB, and matK genes, we show that Aldrovanda is sister to Dionaea, and this pair is sister to Drosera. Our results indicate that snap-traps are derived from flypaper-traps and have a common ancestry among flowering plants, despite the fact that this mechanism is used by both a terrestrial species and an aquatic one. Genetic and fossil evidence for the close relationship between these unique and threatened organisms indicate that carnivory evolved from a common ancestor within this caryophyllid clade at least 65 million years ago. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 4% |
| Germany | 4 | 3% |
| Brazil | 4 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 141 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 15% |
| Researcher | 18 | 11% |
| Professor | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 32 | 20% |
| Unknown | 13 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 105 | 66% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 17 | 11% |
| Environmental Science | 11 | 7% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 13 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,573,138
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Botany
#246
of 4,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,478
of 45,903 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Botany
#3
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 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 4,243 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 45,903 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.