↓ Skip to main content

How does molecular-assisted identification affect our estimation of α, β and γ biodiversity? An example from understory red seaweeds (Rhodophyta) of Laminaria kelp forests in Brittany, France

Overview of attention for article published in Genetica, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
How does molecular-assisted identification affect our estimation of α, β and γ biodiversity? An example from understory red seaweeds (Rhodophyta) of Laminaria kelp forests in Brittany, France
Published in
Genetica, October 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10709-014-9796-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marine Robuchon, Myriam Valero, Delphine Gey, Line Le Gall

Abstract

Using two distinct identification methods, one based on morphological characters only and the other combining morphological and molecular characters (integrative identification method), we investigated the differences in the biodiversity patterns of red seaweed communities associated with kelp forests at various spatial scales: the regional diversity of Brittany, France (γ-diversity), the local diversity at different Breton sites (α-diversity) and the differentiation in species diversity and abundances among those sites (β-diversity). To characterise α and β diversities, we conducted an initial survey in winter 2011 at 20 sites belonging to four different sub-regions, with specimens collected from six quadrats of 0.10 m(2) at each site, three in the tidal zone dominated by Laminaria digitata and three in the zone dominated by Laminaria hyperborea. To further characterise the regional diversity, we carried out another survey combining several sampling methods (quadrats and visual census) in different seasons (winter, spring and summer) and different years (2011 and 2012). In all, we collected 1990 specimens that were assigned to 76 taxa with the identification method based on morphological characters and 139 taxa using the integrative method. For γ and α diversity, the use of molecular characters revealed several cases of cryptic diversity and both increased the number of identified taxa and improved their taxonomic resolution. However, the addition of molecular characters for specimen identification only slightly affected estimates of β-diversity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 24%
Student > Master 9 21%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Professor 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 40%
Environmental Science 7 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 10%
Unspecified 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 9 21%
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 01 November 2014.
All research outputs
#15,309,583
of 22,769,322 outputs
Outputs from Genetica
#476
of 713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,715
of 260,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetica
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,769,322 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 713 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 260,656 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.