↓ Skip to main content

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 (#8 of 9,047)
  • 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
619 tweeters
facebook
20 Facebook pages
wikipedia
10 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
2 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
305 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

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 619 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 305 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 3%
Germany 3 <1%
Czech Republic 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 284 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 59 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 58 19%
Researcher 58 19%
Student > Master 48 16%
Other 15 5%
Other 67 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 190 62%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 37 12%
Environmental Science 27 9%
Unspecified 20 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 2%
Other 24 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2001. 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 07 October 2018.
All research outputs
#545
of 11,927,896 outputs
Outputs from Current Biology
#8
of 9,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28
of 260,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Biology
#2
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,927,896 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 9,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.7. 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 260,578 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 221 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.