↓ Skip to main content

Comment on “Evidence for mesothermy in dinosaurs”

Overview of attention for article published in Science, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
8 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
2 Google+ users
reddit
3 Redditors
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Comment on “Evidence for mesothermy in dinosaurs”
Published in
Science, May 2015
DOI 10.1126/science.1260061
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Grady et al. (Reports, 13 June 2014, p. 1268) suggested that nonavian dinosaur metabolism was neither endothermic nor ectothermic but an intermediate physiology termed "mesothermic." However, rates were improperly scaled and phylogenetic, physiological, and temporal categories of animals were conflated during analyses. Accounting for these issues suggests that nonavian dinosaurs were on average as endothermic as extant placental mammals.

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 profiles of 8 X users 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 38 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 %
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 29%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 11 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 10 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 21%
Environmental Science 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 12 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 103. 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 November 2025.
All research outputs
#522,304
of 34,593,328 outputs
Outputs from Science
#11,930
of 94,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,626
of 306,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#204
of 1,346 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,593,328 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 94,206 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
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 306,551 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,346 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.