↓ Skip to main content

Sex-specific selection for MHC variability in Alpine chamois

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
Sex-specific selection for MHC variability in Alpine chamois
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, February 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-12-20
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helmut Schaschl, Franz Suchentrunk, David L Morris, Hichem Ben Slimen, Steve Smith, Walter Arnold

Abstract

In mammals, males typically have shorter lives than females. This difference is thought to be due to behavioural traits which enhance competitive abilities, and hence male reproductive success, but impair survival. Furthermore, in many species males usually show higher parasite burden than females. Consequently, the intensity of selection for genetic factors which reduce susceptibility to pathogens may differ between sexes. High variability at the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) genes is believed to be advantageous for detecting and combating the range of infectious agents present in the environment. Increased heterozygosity at these immune genes is expected to be important for individual longevity. However, whether males in natural populations benefit more from MHC heterozygosity than females has rarely been investigated. We investigated this question in a long-term study of free-living Alpine chamois (Rupicapra rupicapra), a polygynous mountain ungulate.

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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Croatia 1 1%
Serbia 1 1%
Unknown 63 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 22%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 8 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 46 67%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 4%
Environmental Science 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 10 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 May 2012.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2,928
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,437
of 258,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#23
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 258,163 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.