Renee S. Hoekzema, Martin D. Brasier, Frances S. Dunn, Alexander G. Liu
Abstract
The late Ediacaran soft-bodied macroorganism Dickinsonia (age range approx. 560-550 Ma) has often been interpreted as an early animal, and is increasingly invoked in debate on the evolutionary assembly of eumetazoan body plans. However, conclusive positive evidence in support of such a phylogenetic affinity has not been forthcoming. Here we subject a collection of Dickinsonia specimens interpreted to represent multiple ontogenetic stages to a novel, quantitative method for studying growth and development in organisms with an iterative body plan. Our study demonstrates that Dickinsonia grew via pre-terminal 'deltoidal' insertion and inflation of constructional units, followed by a later inflation-dominated phase of growth. This growth model is contrary to the widely held assumption that Dickinsonia grew via terminal addition of units at the end of the organism bearing the smallest units. When considered alongside morphological and behavioural attributes, our developmental data phylogenetically constrain Dickinsonia to the Metazoa, specifically the Eumetazoa plus Placozoa total group. Our findings have implications for the use of Dickinsonia in developmental debates surrounding the metazoan acquisition of axis specification and metamerism.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 125. 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 24 July 2022.
All research outputs
#350,798
of 26,311,549 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#862
of 11,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,162
of 328,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#21
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,311,549 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,600 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 41.0. 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 328,425 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 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
