↓ Skip to main content

History is written by the victors: The effect of the push of the past on the fossil record

Overview of attention for article published in Evolution, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#25 of 3,567)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
History is written by the victors: The effect of the push of the past on the fossil record
Published in
Evolution, September 2018
DOI 10.1111/evo.13593
Pubmed ID
Authors

Graham E. Budd, Richard P. Mann

Abstract

Survivorship biases can generate remarkable apparent rate heterogeneities through time in otherwise homogeneous birth-death models of phylogenies. They are a potential explanation for many striking patterns seen in the fossil record and molecular phylogenies. One such bias is the "push of the past": clades that survived a substantial length of time are likely to have experienced a high rate of early diversification. This creates the illusion of a secular rate slow-down through time that is, rather, a reversion to the mean. An extra effect increasing early rates of lineage generation is also seen in large clades. These biases are important but relatively neglected influences on many aspects of diversification patterns in the fossil record and elsewhere, such as diversification spikes after mass extinctions and at the origins of clades; they also influence rates of fossilization, changes in rates of phenotypic evolution and even molecular clocks. These inevitable features of surviving and/or large clades should thus not be generalized to the diversification process as a whole without additional study of small and extinct clades, and raise questions about many of the traditional explanations of the patterns seen in the fossil record.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 54 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 25%
Researcher 11 21%
Student > Bachelor 9 17%
Student > Master 6 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Other 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 47%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 9 17%
Unspecified 5 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Environmental Science 4 8%
Other 6 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 99. 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 30 January 2019.
All research outputs
#162,180
of 13,504,707 outputs
Outputs from Evolution
#25
of 3,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,599
of 266,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolution
#2
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,504,707 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,567 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. 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 266,727 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 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 97% of its contemporaries.