↓ Skip to main content

Extreme positive allometry of animal adhesive pads and the size limits of adhesion-based climbing

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, January 2016
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
28 news outlets
blogs
9 blogs
twitter
28 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
26 Google+ users
video
3 YouTube creators
podcasts
2 podcasts

Readers on

mendeley
178 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
Extreme positive allometry of animal adhesive pads and the size limits of adhesion-based climbing
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, January 2016
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1519459113
Pubmed ID
Authors

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 28 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 178 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 6 3%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Japan 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 168 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 28%
Student > Bachelor 28 16%
Student > Master 23 13%
Researcher 13 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 5%
Other 28 16%
Unknown 27 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 60 34%
Engineering 25 14%
Materials Science 17 10%
Environmental Science 8 4%
Physics and Astronomy 5 3%
Other 23 13%
Unknown 40 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 303. 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 30 September 2026.
All research outputs
#144,466
of 34,447,360 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#2,899
of 119,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,993
of 449,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#44
of 841 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,447,360 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 119,063 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 449,084 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 841 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.