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 |
Ingestion of radioactively contaminated diets for two generations in the pale grass blue butterfly
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ecology and Evolution, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12862-014-0193-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chiyo Nohara, Wataru Taira, Atsuki Hiyama, Akira Tanahara, Toshihiro Takatsuji, Joji M Otaki |
| Abstract |
The release of radioactive materials due to the Fukushima nuclear accident has raised concern regarding the biological impacts of ingesting radioactively contaminated diets on organisms. We previously performed an internal exposure experiment in which contaminated leaves collected from polluted areas were fed to larvae of the pale grass blue butterfly, Zizeeria maha, from Okinawa, which is one of the least polluted localities in Japan. Using the same experimental system, in the present study, we further examined the effects of low-level-contaminated diets on this butterfly. Leaves were collected from two localities in Tohoku (Motomiya (161 Bq/kg) and Koriyama (117 Bq/kg)); two in Kanto (Kashiwa (47.6 Bq/kg) and Musashino (6.4 Bq/kg)); one in Tokai (Atami (2.5 Bq/kg)); and from Okinawa (0.2 Bq/kg). In addition to the effects on the first generation, we examined the possible transgenerational effects of the diets on the next generation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 163 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 45 | 28% |
| Australia | 3 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Finland | 2 | 1% |
| Canada | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 5 | 3% |
| Unknown | 100 | 61% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 159 | 98% |
| Scientists | 2 | 1% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | <1% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 29 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 23% |
| Researcher | 5 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 9 | 30% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 232. 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 14 February 2019.
All research outputs
#166,915
of 25,774,185 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#19
of 3,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,448
of 263,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,774,185 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 3,726 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. 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 263,909 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 57 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 96% of its contemporaries.