↓ Skip to main content

The “Island Rule” and Deep-Sea Gastropods: Re-Examining the Evidence

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
wikipedia
655 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
The “Island Rule” and Deep-Sea Gastropods: Re-Examining the Evidence
Published in
PLoS ONE, January 2010
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0008776
Pubmed ID
Authors

John J. Welch

Abstract

One of the most intriguing patterns in mammalian biogeography is the "island rule", which states that colonising species have a tendency to converge in body size, with larger species evolving decreased sizes and smaller species increased sizes. It has recently been suggested that an analogous pattern holds for the colonisation of the deep-sea benthos by marine Gastropoda. In particular, a pioneering study showed that gastropods from the Western Atlantic showed the same graded trend from dwarfism to gigantism that is evident in island endemic mammals. However, subsequent to the publication of the gastropod study, the standard tests of the island rule have been shown to yield false positives at a very high rate, leaving the result open to doubt.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 6%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Unknown 63 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 18%
Student > Master 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 4 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 59%
Environmental Science 12 17%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 6 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 25 January 2020.
All research outputs
#2,024,665
of 14,222,420 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#29,044
of 148,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,704
of 283,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#578
of 2,894 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,222,420 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 148,477 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 283,960 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,894 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.