↓ Skip to main content

Middleborns Disadvantaged? Testing Birth-Order Effects on Fitness in Pre-Industrial Finns

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Middleborns Disadvantaged? Testing Birth-Order Effects on Fitness in Pre-Industrial Finns
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2009
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0005680
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charlotte Faurie, Andrew F. Russell, Virpi Lummaa

Abstract

Parental investment is a limited resource for which offspring compete in order to increase their own survival and reproductive success. However, parents might be selected to influence the outcome of sibling competition through differential investment. While evidence for this is widespread in egg-laying species, whether or not this may also be the case in viviparous species is more difficult to determine. We use pre-industrial Finns as our model system and an equal investment model as our null hypothesis, which predicts that (all else being equal) middleborns should be disadvantaged through competition. We found no overall evidence to suggest that middleborns in a family are disadvantaged in terms of their survival, age at first reproduction or lifetime reproductive success. However, when considering birth-order only among same-sexed siblings, first-, middle- and lastborn sons significantly differed in the number of offspring they were able to rear to adulthood, although there was no similar effect among females. Middleborn sons appeared to produce significantly less offspring than first- or lastborn sons, but they did not significantly differ from lastborn sons in the number of offspring reared to adulthood. Our results thus show that taking sex differences into account is important when modelling birth-order effects. We found clear evidence of firstborn sons being advantaged over other sons in the family, and over firstborn daughters. Therefore, our results suggest that parents invest differentially in their offspring in order to both preferentially favour particular offspring or reduce offspring inequalities arising from sibling competition.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Czechia 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 2%
Romania 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 60 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 20%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 4 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 35%
Psychology 9 14%
Social Sciences 7 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Environmental Science 3 5%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 8 12%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 June 2014.
All research outputs
#7,454,951
of 22,790,780 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#88,772
of 194,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,879
of 108,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#252
of 493 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,790,780 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 194,543 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 108,447 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 493 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.