↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
Molecular analysis of the genera Hapalotrema Looss, 1899 and Learedius Price, 1934 (Digenea: Spirorchiidae) reveals potential cryptic species, with comments on the validity of the genus Learedius
Published in
Systematic Parasitology, January 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11230-014-9535-y
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Adult blood flukes of the genera Hapalotrema Looss, 1899 and Learedius Price, 1934 were collected from turtles off Queensland and the Hawaiian Islands. Specimens were identified as Hapalotrema pambanensis Mehrotra, 1973, H. synorchis Luhman, 1935, H. postorchis Rao, 1976 and Learedius learedi Price, 1934 on the basis of morphology. No major morphological differences were found between specimens from this study and previously published descriptions. DNA was also extracted and sequences obtained using custom spirorchiid-specific primers for the ITS2 and 28S rDNA regions, in order to confirm species identification and investigate phylogenetic relationships. Intraspecific genetic variation was generally low. However the ITS2 region of H. postorchis and to a lesser extent that of L. learedi showed considerable variation between specimens from the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. Further studies will be required to determine whether this variation should be considered inter- or intra-specific. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic analyses were completed for both sequenced genes. Learedius learedi was unequivocally nested among species of Hapalotrema, suggesting that the status of the genus Learedius may need to be reassessed.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 19 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 %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Other 1 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 8 42%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 11%
Environmental Science 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 8 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 January 2015.
All research outputs
#18,038,711
of 26,397,269 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Parasitology
#539
of 803 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,384
of 363,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Parasitology
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,397,269 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 803 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 363,731 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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.