| Title |
From species descriptions to diversity patterns: the validation of taxonomic data as a keystone for ant diversity studies reproducibility and accuracy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Royal Society Open Science, February 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1098/rsos.221170 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rodrigo M. Feitosa, Thiago S. R. Silva, Gabriela P. Camacho, Mônica A. Ulysséa, Natalia Ladino, Aline M. Oliveira, Emília Z. de Albuquerque, Carla R. Ribas, Fernando A. Schmidt, Maria Santina de C. Morini, Rogério R. da Silva, Wesley Dáttilo, Antônio C. M. de Queiroz, Fabrício B. Baccaro, Jean C. Santos, Karine S. Carvalho, Tathiana G. Sobrinho, Yves P. Quinet, Aline B. Moraes, André B. Vargas, Helena Maura Torezan-Silingardi, Jorge Luiz P. Souza, Tatianne Marques, Thiago Izzo, Denise Lange, Iracenir A. dos Santos, Kleber Del-Claro, Larissa Nahas, Lucas Paolucci, Stela A. Soares, Ana Y. Harada, Ananza M. Rabello, Cinthia B. da Costa-Milanez, Eduardo Diehl-Fleig, Renata B. F. Campos, Ricardo Solar, Tiago Frizzo, Wesley DaRocha, Anselmo Nogueira |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 11 | 28% |
| United States | 3 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 5% |
| Germany | 2 | 5% |
| Colombia | 2 | 5% |
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 15 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 54% |
| Scientists | 15 | 38% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 5% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 19% |
| Professor | 2 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 6 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 38% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 03 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,398,581
of 25,628,260 outputs
Outputs from Royal Society Open Science
#1,213
of 4,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,101
of 476,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Royal Society Open Science
#27
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,628,260 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,818 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 52.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 476,982 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 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.