Sponge taxonomy can be challenging as many groups exhibit extreme morphological plasticity induced by local environmental conditions. Foliose keratose sponges of the sub-family Phyllospongiinae (Dictyoceratida, Thorectidae: Strepsichordaia, Phyllospongia and Carteriospongia) are commonly found in intertidal and subtidal habitats of the Indo-Pacific. Lacking spicules, these sponges can be difficult to differentiate due to the lack of reliable morphological characters for species delineation. We use molecular phylogenies inferred from the nuclear Internal Transcribed Spacer 2 region (ITS2) and morphometrics (19 characters; 52 character states) to identify evolutionarily significant units (ESUs; sensu Moritz) within foliose Phyllosponginiids collected from seven geographic locations across tropical eastern and Western Australia. The ITS2 topology was congruent with the tree derived from Bayesian inference of discrete morphological characters supporting expected taxonomic relationships at the genus level and the identification of five ESUs. However, phylogenies inferred from the ITS2 marker revealed multiple sequence clusters, some of which were characterised by distinct morphological features and specific geographic ranges. Our results are discussed in light of taxonomic incongruences within this study, hidden sponge diversity and the role of vicariant events in influencing present day distribution patterns.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 September 2014.
All research outputs
#22,888,988
of 33,918,391 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution
#4,377
of 5,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,865
of 371,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution
#38
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,918,391 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,339 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 371,693 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
