| Title |
Evidence for a single loss of mineralized teeth in the common avian ancestor
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1126/science.1254390 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert W Meredith, Guojie Zhang, M Thomas P Gilbert, Erich D Jarvis, Mark S Springer |
| Abstract |
Edentulism, the absence of teeth, has evolved convergently among vertebrates, including birds, turtles, and several lineages of mammals. Instead of teeth, modern birds (Neornithes) use a horny beak (rhamphotheca) and a muscular gizzard to acquire and process food. We performed comparative genomic analyses representing lineages of nearly all extant bird orders and recovered shared, inactivating mutations within genes expressed in both the enamel and dentin of teeth of other vertebrate species, indicating that the common ancestor of modern birds lacked mineralized teeth. We estimate that tooth loss, or at least the loss of enamel caps that provide the outer layer of mineralized teeth, occurred about 116 million years ago. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 64 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 17 | 27% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 8% |
| Spain | 3 | 5% |
| Australia | 2 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Czechia | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Finland | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 45 | 70% |
| Scientists | 13 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 8% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 277 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 4 | 1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Lithuania | 1 | <1% |
| Costa Rica | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 1% |
| Unknown | 258 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 64 | 23% |
| Researcher | 49 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 37 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 12% |
| Professor | 15 | 5% |
| Other | 43 | 16% |
| Unknown | 37 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 149 | 54% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 35 | 13% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 17 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 11 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 6% |
| Unknown | 43 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 271. 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 26 April 2023.
All research outputs
#136,415
of 25,853,983 outputs
Outputs from Science
#4,253
of 83,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,348
of 370,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#54
of 888 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,853,983 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83,357 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.1. 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 370,420 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 888 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 93% of its contemporaries.