↓ Skip to main content

A commentary on the XIIIth International Rotifer Symposium (Shillong, 2012)

Overview of attention for article published in Aquatic Biosystems, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
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.
Title
A commentary on the XIIIth International Rotifer Symposium (Shillong, 2012)
Published in
Aquatic Biosystems, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/2046-9063-9-13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Lee Wallace, SSS Sarma, S Nandini

Abstract

Rotifers have attracted the attention of biologists for well over 200 years. Interest in these exquisite animals rests in their diverse morphology, short generation time resulting in high growth rates, ability to withstand desiccation, and wide distribution, coupled with evidence of cryptic speciation. Moreover, three modes of reproduction are present in the phylum: obligatory sexuality, cyclical parthenogenesis, and obligatory ameiotic parthenogenesis. Thus, this phylum offers a rich field of study. Recognizing the need to share advances in knowledge, a triennial meeting, the International Rotifer Symposium (IRS), was begun in 1976. The most recent symposium (13(th) IRS) was held at Shillong (India) from 18-24, November 2012. In this commentary we considered the development of rotifer research as viewed through the lens of more than 35 years of IRS. Initially papers presented at the IRS focused on ecology, morphology, and pure taxonomic problems, with little applied work being reported. However, after more than three decades, the emphasis has swung to a balance of both basic (e.g., aging, ecology, genetics, and taxonomy) and applied (aquaculture and ecotoxicology) research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 40%
Lecturer 3 20%
Professor 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 47%
Environmental Science 3 20%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 July 2013.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Aquatic Biosystems
#60
of 74 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,444
of 206,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Aquatic Biosystems
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 74 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 206,705 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.