↓ Skip to main content

Labile evolution of display traits in bowerbirds indicates reduced effects of phylogenetic constraint

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, March 1997
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
123 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
Labile evolution of display traits in bowerbirds indicates reduced effects of phylogenetic constraint
Published in
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, March 1997
DOI 10.1098/rspb.1997.0044
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Bowerbirds (Ptilonorhynchidae) have among the most exaggerated sets of display traits known, including bowers, decorated display courts and bright plumage, that differ greatly in form and degree of elaboration among species. Mapping bower and plumage traits on an independently derived phylogeny constructed from mitochondrial cytochrome b sequences revealed large differences in display traits between closely related species and convergences in both morphological and behavioural traits. Plumage characters showed no effect of phylogenetic inertia, although bowers exhibited some constraint at the more fundamental level of design, but above which they appeared free of constraint. Bowers and plumage characters, therefore, are poor indicators of phylogenetic relationship in this group. Testing Gilliard's (1969) transferral hypothesis indicated some support for the idea that the focus of display has shifted from bird to bower in avenue-building species, but not in maypole-builders or in bowerbirds as a whole.

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 123 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 3 2%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Romania 1 <1%
Hungary 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 111 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 18%
Student > Master 17 14%
Professor 9 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 26 21%
Unknown 16 13%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 87 71%
Environmental Science 7 6%
Computer Science 2 2%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 <1%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 20 16%
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 22 January 2023.
All research outputs
#12,344,266
of 34,360,257 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#9,226
of 12,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,187
of 43,086 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#14
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,360,257 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.4. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 43,086 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.