↓ Skip to main content

Limbs in whales and limblessness in other vertebrates: mechanisms of evolutionary and developmental transformation and loss

Overview of attention for article published in Evolution & Development, December 2002
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
30 Wikipedia pages
reddit
2 Redditors
video
2 YouTube creators

Readers on

mendeley
433 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Limbs in whales and limblessness in other vertebrates: mechanisms of evolutionary and developmental transformation and loss
Published in
Evolution & Development, December 2002
DOI 10.1046/j.1525-142x.2002.02033.x
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We address the developmental and evolutionary mechanisms underlying fore- and hindlimb development and progressive hindlimb reduction and skeletal loss in whales and evaluate whether the genetic, developmental, and evolutionary mechanisms thought to be responsible for limb loss in snakes "explain" loss of the hindlimbs in whales. Limb loss and concurrent morphological and physiological changes associated with the transition from land to water are discussed within the context of the current whale phylogeny. Emphasis is placed on fore- and hindlimb development, how the forelimbs transformed into flippers, and how the hindlimbs regressed, leaving either no elements or vestigial skeletal elements. Hindlimbs likely began to regress only after the ancestors of whales entered the aquatic environment: Hindlimb function was co-opted by the undulatory vertical axial locomotion made possible by the newly evolved caudal flukes. Loss of the hindlimbs was associated with elongation of the body during the transition from land to water. Limblessness in most snakes is also associated with adoption of a new (burrowing) lifestyle and was driven by developmental changes associated with elongation of the body. Parallels between adaptation to burrowing or to the aquatic environment reflect structural and functional changes associated with the switch to axial locomotion. Because they are more fully studied and to determine whether hindlimb loss in lineages that are not closely related could result from similar genetically controlled developmental pathways, we discuss developmental (cellular and genetic) processes that may have driven limb loss in snakes and leg-less lizards and compare these processes to the loss of hindlimbs in whales. In neither group does ontogenetic or phylogenetic limb reduction result from failure to initiate limb development. In both groups limb loss results from arrested development at the limb bud stage, as a result of inability to maintain necessary inductive tissue interactions and enhanced cell death over that seen in limbed tetrapods. An evolutionary change in Hox gene expression--as occurs in snakes--or in Hox gene regulation--as occurs in some limbless mutants--is unlikely to have initiated loss of the hindlimbs in cetaceans. Selective pressures acting on a wide range of developmental processes and adult traits other than the limbs are likely to have driven the loss of hindlimbs in whales.

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 433 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 9 2%
Brazil 8 2%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Mexico 4 <1%
Argentina 3 <1%
France 3 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Other 8 2%
Unknown 388 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 89 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 75 17%
Student > Bachelor 59 14%
Student > Master 47 11%
Professor 26 6%
Other 90 21%
Unknown 47 11%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 281 65%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 32 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 25 6%
Environmental Science 20 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 <1%
Other 16 4%
Unknown 55 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 13 November 2025.
All research outputs
#2,584,161
of 31,943,232 outputs
Outputs from Evolution & Development
#59
of 622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,943
of 179,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolution & Development
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,943,232 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 179,408 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.