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 |
The evolution of reproductive isolation through sexual conflict
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, June 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nature01752 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Oliver Y. Martin, David J. Hosken |
| Abstract |
Classical population-genetics theory suggests that reproductive isolation will evolve fastest in small isolated populations. In contrast, recent theory suggests that divergence should occur fastest in larger allopatric populations. The rationale behind this is that sexual conflict, potentially the strongest driver of speciation, is greater in larger, higher-density populations. This idea is highly controversial and has little experimental support. Here we show, using replicate fly populations with varying levels of sexual conflict, that larger, more dense populations with more sexual conflict diverged to a greater degree than small populations with relaxed conflict. This result strongly suggests that speciation can occur rapidly in large populations through increased sexual conflict. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 396 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 2% |
| Germany | 5 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 3 | <1% |
| Mexico | 3 | <1% |
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| Brazil | 3 | <1% |
| India | 3 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 13 | 3% |
| Unknown | 350 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 102 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 100 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 7% |
| Professor | 28 | 7% |
| Other | 75 | 19% |
| Unknown | 30 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 281 | 71% |
| Environmental Science | 23 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 1% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 19 | 5% |
| Unknown | 45 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 20 July 2022.
All research outputs
#4,536,582
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#54,820
of 91,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,077
of 50,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#195
of 388 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 91,085 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 99.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 50,103 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 388 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.