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 |
The giant deep-sea octopus Haliphron atlanticus forages on gelatinous fauna
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep44952 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
H.J.T. Hoving, S.H.D. Haddock |
| Abstract |
Feeding strategies and predator-prey interactions of many deep-sea pelagic organisms are still unknown. This is also true for pelagic cephalopods, some of which are very abundant in oceanic ecosystems and which are known for their elaborate behaviors and central role in many foodwebs. We report on the first observations of the giant deep-sea octopus Haliphron atlanticus with prey. Using remotely operated vehicles, we saw these giant octopods holding medusae in their arms. One of the medusae could be identified as Phacellophora camtschatica (the egg-yolk jelly). Stomach content analysis confirmed predation on cnidarians and gelatinous organisms. The relationship between medusae and H. atlanticus is discussed, also in comparison with other species of the Argonautoidea, all of which have close relationships with gelatinous zooplankton. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 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 | 9 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 9% |
| Mexico | 2 | 4% |
| Spain | 2 | 4% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Singapore | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Guinea-Bissau | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 28 | 53% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 42 | 79% |
| Scientists | 10 | 19% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 96 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 19% |
| Researcher | 18 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 20 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 37 | 39% |
| Environmental Science | 11 | 11% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 9 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 22 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 351. 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 21 December 2023.
All research outputs
#88,395
of 24,701,594 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#1,145
of 134,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,159
of 313,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#40
of 4,387 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,701,594 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 134,935 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. 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 313,753 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 4,387 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.