↓ Skip to main content

Colour Patterns Do Not Diagnose Species: Quantitative Evaluation of a DNA Barcoded Cryptic Bumblebee Complex

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
108 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
Colour Patterns Do Not Diagnose Species: Quantitative Evaluation of a DNA Barcoded Cryptic Bumblebee Complex
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0029251
Pubmed ID
Authors

James C. Carolan, Tomás E. Murray, Úna Fitzpatrick, John Crossley, Hans Schmidt, Björn Cederberg, Luke McNally, Robert J. Paxton, Paul H. Williams, Mark J. F. Brown

Abstract

Cryptic diversity within bumblebees (Bombus) has the potential to undermine crucial conservation efforts designed to reverse the observed decline in many bumblebee species worldwide. Central to such efforts is the ability to correctly recognise and diagnose species. The B. lucorum complex (Bombus lucorum, B. cryptarum and B. magnus) comprises one of the most abundant and important group of wild plant and crop pollinators in northern Europe. Although the workers of these species are notoriously difficult to diagnose morphologically, it has been claimed that queens are readily diagnosable from morphological characters. Here we assess the value of colour-pattern characters in species identification of DNA-barcoded queens from the B. lucorum complex. Three distinct molecular operational taxonomic units were identified each representing one species. However, no uniquely diagnostic colour-pattern character state was found for any of these three molecular units and most colour-pattern characters showed continuous variation among the units. All characters previously deemed to be unique and diagnostic for one species were displayed by specimens molecularly identified as a different species. These results presented here raise questions on the reliability of species determinations in previous studies and highlights the benefits of implementing DNA barcoding prior to ecological, taxonomic and conservation studies of these important key pollinators.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
France 2 1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 137 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 19%
Student > Master 28 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 13%
Student > Bachelor 18 12%
Other 7 5%
Other 26 17%
Unknown 21 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 83 56%
Environmental Science 14 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 2%
Social Sciences 2 1%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 27 18%
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 10 June 2022.
All research outputs
#12,842,453
of 22,641,687 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#99,943
of 193,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,705
of 241,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,377
of 3,085 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,641,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,352 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 241,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,085 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 54% of its contemporaries.