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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A higher-level MRP supertree of placental mammals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ecology and Evolution, November 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2148-6-93 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robin MD Beck, Olaf RP Bininda-Emonds, Marcel Cardillo, Fu-Guo Robert Liu, Andy Purvis |
| Abstract |
The higher-level phylogeny of placental mammals has long been a phylogenetic Gordian knot, with disagreement about both the precise contents of, and relationships between, the extant orders. A recent MRP supertree that favoured 'outdated' hypotheses (notably, monophyly of both Artiodactyla and Lipotyphla) has been heavily criticised for including low-quality and redundant data. We apply a stringent data selection protocol designed to minimise these problems to a much-expanded data set of morphological, molecular and combined source trees, to produce a supertree that includes every family of extant placental mammals. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 20% |
| Japan | 3 | 15% |
| Thailand | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 80% |
| Scientists | 4 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 280 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 11 | 4% |
| Brazil | 8 | 3% |
| Germany | 6 | 2% |
| Spain | 3 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Chile | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 8 | 3% |
| Unknown | 234 | 84% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 71 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 56 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 36 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 10% |
| Professor | 16 | 6% |
| Other | 51 | 18% |
| Unknown | 22 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 166 | 59% |
| Environmental Science | 24 | 9% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 23 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 5% |
| Unknown | 29 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 02 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,161,511
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#264
of 3,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,946
of 87,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,724 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 87,188 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 90% of its contemporaries.