↓ Skip to main content

Ancestry of motor innervation to pectoral fin and forelimb

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, July 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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
196 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
Ancestry of motor innervation to pectoral fin and forelimb
Published in
Nature Communications, July 2010
DOI 10.1038/ncomms1045
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leung-Hang Ma, Edwin Gilland, Andrew H. Bass, Robert Baker

Abstract

Motor innervation to the tetrapod forelimb and fish pectoral fin is assumed to share a conserved spinal cord origin, despite major structural and functional innovations of the appendage during the vertebrate water-to-land transition. In this paper, we present anatomical and embryological evidence showing that pectoral motoneurons also originate in the hindbrain among ray-finned fish. New and previous data for lobe-finned fish, a group that includes tetrapods, and more basal cartilaginous fish showed pectoral innervation that was consistent with a hindbrain-spinal origin of motoneurons. Together, these findings support a hindbrain-spinal phenotype as the ancestral vertebrate condition that originated as a postural adaptation for pectoral control of head orientation. A phylogenetic analysis indicated that Hox gene modules were shared in fish and tetrapod pectoral systems. We propose that evolutionary shifts in Hox gene expression along the body axis provided a transcriptional mechanism allowing eventual decoupling of pectoral motoneurons from the hindbrain much like their target appendage gained independence from the head.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 180 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 52 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 17%
Student > Master 17 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 16 8%
Student > Bachelor 15 8%
Other 36 18%
Unknown 27 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 82 42%
Physics and Astronomy 32 16%
Neuroscience 20 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 7 4%
Other 16 8%
Unknown 27 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#2,354,814
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#25,534
of 46,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,877
of 93,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#10
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 46,568 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.4. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 93,816 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.