Multi-locus Analyses Reveal Four Giraffe Species Instead of One

Overview of attention for article published in Current Biology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#4 of 6,511)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
181 news outlets
blogs
15 blogs
twitter
617 tweeters
facebook
16 Facebook pages
wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
1 video uploader

Readers on

mendeley
192 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Multi-locus Analyses Reveal Four Giraffe Species Instead of One
Published in
Current Biology, September 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2016.07.036
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julian Fennessy, Tobias Bidon, Friederike Reuss, Vikas Kumar, Paul Elkan, Maria A. Nilsson, Melita Vamberger, Uwe Fritz, Axel Janke, Fennessy, Julian, Bidon, Tobias, Reuss, Friederike, Kumar, Vikas, Elkan, Paul, Nilsson, Maria A, Vamberger, Melita, Fritz, Uwe, Janke, Axel

Abstract

Traditionally, one giraffe species and up to eleven subspecies have been recognized [1]; however, nine subspecies are commonly accepted [2]. Even after a century of research, the distinctness of each giraffe subspecies remains unclear, and the genetic variation across their distribution range has been incompletely explored. Recent genetic studies on mtDNA have shown reciprocal monophyly of the matrilines among seven of the nine assumed subspecies [3, 4]. Moreover, until now, genetic analyses have not been applied to biparentally inherited sequence data and did not include data from all nine giraffe subspecies. We sampled natural giraffe populations from across their range in Africa, and for the first time individuals from the nominate subspecies, the Nubian giraffe, Giraffa camelopardalis camelopardalis Linnaeus 1758 [5], were included in a genetic analysis. Coalescence-based multi-locus and population genetic analyses identify at least four separate and monophyletic clades, which should be recognized as four distinct giraffe species under the genetic isolation criterion. Analyses of 190 individuals from maternal and biparental markers support these findings and further suggest subsuming Rothschild's giraffe into the Nubian giraffe, as well as Thornicroft's giraffe into the Masai giraffe [6]. A giraffe survey genome produced valuable data from microsatellites, mobile genetic elements, and accurate divergence time estimates. Our findings provide the most inclusive analysis of giraffe relationships to date and show that their genetic complexity has been underestimated, highlighting the need for greater conservation efforts for the world's tallest mammal.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 617 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 192 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 4%
Brazil 4 2%
Germany 3 2%
South Africa 2 1%
Italy 1 <1%
Czech Republic 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 172 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 22%
Student > Master 41 21%
Student > Bachelor 33 17%
Researcher 32 17%
Student > Postgraduate 9 5%
Other 34 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 139 72%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 10%
Environmental Science 16 8%
Computer Science 3 2%
Chemistry 3 2%
Other 12 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2018. 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 24 March 2017.
All research outputs
#226
of 7,458,941 outputs
Outputs from Current Biology
#4
of 6,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19
of 241,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Biology
#2
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,458,941 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 6,511 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 241,492 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 220 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 99% of its contemporaries.