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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Morphological Evolution of Spiders Predicted by Pendulum Mechanics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, March 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0001841 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jordi Moya-Laraño, Dejan Vinković, Eva De Mas, Guadalupe Corcobado, Eulalia Moreno |
| Abstract |
Animals have been hypothesized to benefit from pendulum mechanics during suspensory locomotion, in which the potential energy of gravity is converted into kinetic energy according to the energy-conservation principle. However, no convincing evidence has been found so far. Demonstrating that morphological evolution follows pendulum mechanics is important from a biomechanical point of view because during suspensory locomotion some morphological traits could be decoupled from gravity, thus allowing independent adaptive morphological evolution of these two traits when compared to animals that move standing on their legs; i.e., as inverted pendulums. If the evolution of body shape matches simple pendulum mechanics, animals that move suspending their bodies should evolve relatively longer legs which must confer high moving capabilities. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 4 | 4% |
| United States | 4 | 4% |
| Mexico | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Singapore | 1 | 1% |
| Réunion | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 82 | 85% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 24% |
| Researcher | 18 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 20 | 21% |
| Unknown | 4 | 4% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 63 | 65% |
| Environmental Science | 9 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 January 2021.
All research outputs
#14,783,222
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#123,470
of 194,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,558
of 81,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#256
of 296 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,198 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 81,258 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 296 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.