↓ Skip to main content

A specimen-level phylogenetic analysis and taxonomic revision of Diplodocidae (Dinosauria, Sauropoda)

Overview of attention for article published in PeerJ, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#5 of 3,379)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
67 news outlets
blogs
34 blogs
twitter
385 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
47 Facebook pages
wikipedia
22 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
19 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor
video
1 video uploader

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
Title
A specimen-level phylogenetic analysis and taxonomic revision of Diplodocidae (Dinosauria, Sauropoda)
Published in
PeerJ, April 2015
DOI 10.7717/peerj.857
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emanuel Tschopp, Octávio Mateus, Roger B.J. Benson

Abstract

Diplodocidae are among the best known sauropod dinosaurs. Several species were described in the late 1800s or early 1900s from the Morrison Formation of North America. Since then, numerous additional specimens were recovered in the USA, Tanzania, Portugal, and Argentina, as well as possibly Spain, England, Georgia, Zimbabwe, and Asia. To date, the clade includes about 12 to 15 nominal species, some of them with questionable taxonomic status (e.g., 'Diplodocus' hayi or Dyslocosaurus polyonychius), and ranging in age from Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous. However, intrageneric relationships of the iconic, multi-species genera Apatosaurus and Diplodocus are still poorly known. The way to resolve this issue is a specimen-based phylogenetic analysis, which has been previously implemented for Apatosaurus, but is here performed for the first time for the entire clade of Diplodocidae. The analysis includes 81 operational taxonomic units, 49 of which belong to Diplodocidae. The set of OTUs includes all name-bearing type specimens previously proposed to belong to Diplodocidae, alongside a set of relatively complete referred specimens, which increase the amount of anatomically overlapping material. Non-diplodocid outgroups were selected to test the affinities of potential diplodocid specimens that have subsequently been suggested to belong outside the clade. The specimens were scored for 477 morphological characters, representing one of the most extensive phylogenetic analyses of sauropod dinosaurs. Character states were figured and tables given in the case of numerical characters. The resulting cladogram recovers the classical arrangement of diplodocid relationships. Two numerical approaches were used to increase reproducibility in our taxonomic delimitation of species and genera. This resulted in the proposal that some species previously included in well-known genera like Apatosaurus and Diplodocus are generically distinct. Of particular note is that the famous genus Brontosaurus is considered valid by our quantitative approach. Furthermore, "Diplodocus" hayi represents a unique genus, which will herein be called Galeamopus gen. nov. On the other hand, these numerical approaches imply synonymization of "Dinheirosaurus" from the Late Jurassic of Portugal with the Morrison Formation genus Supersaurus. Our use of a specimen-, rather than species-based approach increases knowledge of intraspecific and intrageneric variation in diplodocids, and the study demonstrates how specimen-based phylogenetic analysis is a valuable tool in sauropod taxonomy, and potentially in paleontology and taxonomy as a whole.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 385 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 6%
Spain 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Chile 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Argentina 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 76 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 29%
Researcher 19 21%
Student > Bachelor 13 15%
Student > Master 7 8%
Other 7 8%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 1 1%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 44 49%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 37%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Physics and Astronomy 2 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 1 1%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1111. 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 04 June 2017.
All research outputs
#1,259
of 7,892,418 outputs
Outputs from PeerJ
#5
of 3,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52
of 200,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PeerJ
#1
of 144 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,892,418 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 3,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 200,511 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 144 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 99% of its contemporaries.