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 |
The karyotypes of the thorny catfishes Wertheimeria maculata Steindachner, 1877 and Hassar wilderi Kindle, 1895 (Siluriformes: Doradidae) and their relevance in doradids chromosomal evolution
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genetica, August 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10709-006-0023-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eduardo S. Eler, Jorge A. Dergam, Paulo C. Vênere, Lílian C. Paiva, Gabriela A. Miranda, Alessandro A. Oliveira |
| Abstract |
We studied the karyotypes of two doradids, the rare and endangered Wertheimeria maculata and a derived Amazonian species, Hassar wilderi. Cytogenetic characterization was assessed using conventional staining (Giemsa), C-banding, and NOR banding. Both species had 2n = 58 chromosomes but differed in their chromosome formulae, 24 m + 14sm + 8st + 12a for W. maculata and 32 m + 16sm + 10st for H. wilderi. In W. maculata heterochromatin was mainly telomeric, and three chromosomes had a fully heterochromatic arm; in H. wilderi heterochromatin was also predominantly telomeric and evident in many more chromosomes. Hassar wilderi also presented one pair of homologues with a fully heterochromatic arm. In both species, nucleolar organizer regions were restricted to one pair of subtelocentric chromosomes. Assuming a basal position for W. maculata, we hypothesized that underlying conserved diploid and NOR-bearing chromosome numbers, chromosomal evolution in doradids has involved pericentric inversions and an increase of heterochromatic blocks. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 35 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 18% |
| Researcher | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 24% |
| Unknown | 2 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 32 | 84% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 2 | 5% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 March 2014.
All research outputs
#7,453,350
of 22,786,087 outputs
Outputs from Genetica
#144
of 713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,794
of 65,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetica
#4
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,786,087 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 65,549 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 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.