↓ Skip to main content

Why join groups? Lessons from parasite‐manipulated Artemia

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology Letters, January 2013
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 (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
104 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.
Article details
Title
Why join groups? Lessons from parasite‐manipulated Artemia
Published in
Ecology Letters, January 2013
DOI 10.1111/ele.12074
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Grouping behaviours (e.g. schooling, shoaling and swarming) are commonly explicated through adaptive hypotheses such as protection against predation, access to mates or improved foraging. However, the hypothesis that aggregation can result from manipulation by parasites to increase their transmission has never been demonstrated. We investigated this hypothesis using natural populations of two crustacean hosts (Artemia franciscana and Artemia parthenogenetica) infected with one cestode and two microsporidian parasites. We found that swarming propensity increased in cestode-infected hosts and that red colour intensity was higher in swarming compared with non-swarming infected hosts. These effects likely result in increased cestode transmission to its final avian host. Furthermore, we found that microsporidian-infected hosts had both increased swarming propensity and surfacing behaviour. Finally, we demonstrated using experimental infections that these concurrent manipulations result in increased spore transmission to new hosts. Hence, this study suggests that parasites can play a prominent role in host grouping behaviours.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Germany 3 3%
South Africa 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 92 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 18%
Student > Master 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 7%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 12 12%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 60%
Environmental Science 12 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 14 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 04 November 2020.
All research outputs
#3,453,651
of 34,752,441 outputs
Outputs from Ecology Letters
#1,467
of 3,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,755
of 347,795 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology Letters
#23
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,752,441 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 3,772 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 347,795 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 51 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 54% of its contemporaries.