↓ Skip to main content

DNA evidence shows vocalizations to be a better indicator of taxonomic limits than plumage patterns in Zimmerius tyrant-flycatchers

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution, May 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
19 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
97 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
DNA evidence shows vocalizations to be a better indicator of taxonomic limits than plumage patterns in Zimmerius tyrant-flycatchers
Published in
Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution, May 2008
DOI 10.1016/j.ympev.2008.04.016
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We investigated mitochondrial and nuclear DNA in the small tyrant-flycatcher genus Zimmerius (Tyrannidae) and show that molecular data are in strong disagreement with morphology-based taxonomy, but in good concordance with vocal characters. Our molecular data identified two independent cases of well-supported polyphyletic species arrangements within this genus that indicate the following taxonomic changes: elevation of Z. acer and Z. albigularis to species level, separation of northern populations of Z. chrysops as a species and inclusion of southern populations of Z. chrysops into Z. viridiflavus. Although polyphyly has rarely been encountered in bird systematics it has previously been shown for two other tyrannid genera and suggests that tyrannid taxonomy may be poorly resolved, presumably as a consequence of the conserved plumage patterns observed in many tyrannid genera. Our study suggests that vocalizations can be a better indicator of taxonomic limits than plumage pattern in tyrannids.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Brazil 3 3%
South Africa 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 90 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 18%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 10 10%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 68 70%
Environmental Science 9 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Mathematics 1 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 10 10%
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 19 March 2025.
All research outputs
#12,060,778
of 33,928,890 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution
#2,564
of 5,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,520
of 135,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution
#12
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,928,890 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 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 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 135,353 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 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.