↓ Skip to main content

Can they dig it? Functional morphology and semifossoriality among small‐eared shrews, genus Cryptotis (Mammalia, Soricidae)

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Morphology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
Can they dig it? Functional morphology and semifossoriality among small‐eared shrews, genus Cryptotis (Mammalia, Soricidae)
Published in
Journal of Morphology, January 2014
DOI 10.1002/jmor.20254
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neal Woodman, Sarah A. Gaffney

Abstract

Small-eared shrews (Mammalia: Soricidae: Cryptotis), exhibit modifications of the forelimb skeleton that have been interpreted as adaptations for semifossoriality. Most species inhabit remote regions, however, and their locomotory and foraging behaviors remain mostly speculative. To better understand the morphological modifications in the absence of direct observations, we quantified variation in these species by measuring 151 individuals representing 18 species and populations of Cryptotis and two species of moles (Talpidae) for comparison. From our measurements, we calculated 22 indices, most of which have been used previously to characterize substrate use among rodents and other taxa. We analyzed the indices using 1) average percentile ranks, 2) principal components analysis, and 3) cluster analysis. From these analyses, we determined that three basic modes of substrate adaptation are present within Cryptotis: 1) a primarily terrestrial mode, with species that are capable of burrowing, but lack adaptations to increase digging efficiency, 2) a semifossorial mode, with species whose forelimbs bones show strong muscle attachment areas and increased mechanical advantage, and 3) an intermediate mode. In addition to identifying new morphological characters and contributing to our understanding of the functional morphology of soricids, these analyses provide additional insight into the ecology of the species of interest. J. Morphol. 275:745-759, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 52 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Student > Master 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Researcher 5 9%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 12 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 57%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 14 26%
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 29 January 2014.
All research outputs
#16,707,477
of 24,571,708 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Morphology
#1,284
of 1,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,446
of 318,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Morphology
#10
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,571,708 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,752 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 318,398 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.