↓ Skip to main content

Adoption in Eastern Grey Kangaroos: A Consequence of Misdirected Care?

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Adoption in Eastern Grey Kangaroos: A Consequence of Misdirected Care?
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0125182
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wendy J. King, David M. Forsyth, Graeme Coulson, Marco Festa-Bianchet

Abstract

Adoption is rare in animals and is usually attributed to kin selection. In a 6-year study of eastern grey kangaroos (Macropus giganteus), 11 of 326 juveniles were adopted. We detected eight adoptions by observing behavioural associations and nursing between marked mothers and young and three more by analysing the relatedness of mothers and young using microsatellite DNA. Four adoptions involved reciprocal switches and three were by mothers whose own pouch young were known to subsequently disappear. Adoptive mothers were not closely related to each other or to adoptees but adoptive mothers and young associated as closely as did biological pairs, as measured by half-weight indices. Switch mothers did not associate closely. Maternal age and body condition did not influence the likelihood of adoption but females were more likely to adopt in years with high densities of females with large pouch young. Adoption did not improve juvenile survival. We conclude that adoptions in this wild population were potentially costly and likely caused by misdirected care, suggesting that eastern grey kangaroos may have poorly developed mother-offspring recognition mechanisms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 23%
Student > Bachelor 6 19%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Researcher 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 7 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 48%
Environmental Science 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Psychology 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 11 November 2021.
All research outputs
#970,067
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#13,154
of 194,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,080
of 264,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#371
of 6,862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,573 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 264,552 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,862 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 94% of its contemporaries.