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 |
Hook innovation boosts foraging efficiency in tool-using crows
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Ecology & Evolution, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41559-017-0429-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James J. H. St Clair, Barbara C. Klump, Shoko Sugasawa, Caitlin G. Higgott, Nick Colegrave, Christian Rutz |
| Abstract |
The New Caledonian crow is the only non-human animal known to craft hooked tools in the wild, but the ecological benefit of these relatively complex tools remains unknown. Here, we show that crows acquire food several times faster when using hooked rather than non-hooked tools, regardless of tool material, prey type and extraction context. This implies that small changes to tool shape can strongly affect energy-intake rates, highlighting a powerful driver for technological advancement. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 178 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 38 | 21% |
| United States | 19 | 11% |
| Netherlands | 5 | 3% |
| Spain | 4 | 2% |
| Brazil | 3 | 2% |
| Canada | 3 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 3 | 2% |
| Guyana | 1 | <1% |
| Lebanon | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 11 | 6% |
| Unknown | 90 | 51% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 142 | 80% |
| Scientists | 26 | 15% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 21% |
| Researcher | 11 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 16% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 34% |
| Psychology | 8 | 14% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 9% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1035. 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 29 December 2023.
All research outputs
#15,558
of 25,755,403 outputs
Outputs from Nature Ecology & Evolution
#50
of 2,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#302
of 452,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Ecology & Evolution
#7
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,755,403 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 2,188 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 149.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 452,889 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 91 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 92% of its contemporaries.