↓ Skip to main content

Broadly sampled multigene trees of eukaryotes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
146 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
Broadly sampled multigene trees of eukaryotes
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2008
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-8-14
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Our understanding of the eukaryotic tree of life and the tremendous diversity of microbial eukaryotes is in flux as additional genes and diverse taxa are sampled for molecular analyses. Despite instability in many analyses, there is an increasing trend to classify eukaryotic diversity into six major supergroups: the 'Amoebozoa', 'Chromalveolata', 'Excavata', 'Opisthokonta', 'Plantae', and 'Rhizaria'. Previous molecular analyses have often suffered from either a broad taxon sampling using only single-gene data or have used multigene data with a limited sample of taxa. This study has two major aims: (1) to place taxa represented by 72 sequences, 61 of which have not been characterized previously, onto a well-sampled multigene genealogy, and (2) to evaluate the support for the six putative supergroups using two taxon-rich data sets and a variety of phylogenetic approaches.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 146 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 %
United States 5 3%
Brazil 3 2%
Russia 2 1%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Spain 2 1%
Germany 2 1%
Canada 2 1%
Argentina 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Other 5 3%
Unknown 120 82%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 43 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 16%
Student > Master 17 12%
Professor 13 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 7%
Other 23 16%
Unknown 16 11%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 90 62%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 9%
Environmental Science 7 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 3%
Other 8 5%
Unknown 20 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 August 2025.
All research outputs
#12,425,541
of 34,517,289 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2,013
of 3,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,069
of 224,790 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#30
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,517,289 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,627 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 224,790 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.