| Title |
Six reference-quality genomes reveal evolution of bat adaptations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, July 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41586-020-2486-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Jebb, Zixia Huang, Martin Pippel, Graham M. Hughes, Ksenia Lavrichenko, Paolo Devanna, Sylke Winkler, Lars S. Jermiin, Emilia C. Skirmuntt, Aris Katzourakis, Lucy Burkitt-Gray, David A. Ray, Kevin A. M. Sullivan, Juliana G. Roscito, Bogdan M. Kirilenko, Liliana M. Dávalos, Angelique P. Corthals, Megan L. Power, Gareth Jones, Roger D. Ransome, Dina K. N. Dechmann, Andrea G. Locatelli, Sébastien J. Puechmaille, Olivier Fedrigo, Erich D. Jarvis, Michael Hiller, Sonja C. Vernes, Eugene W. Myers, Emma C. Teeling |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 515 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 112 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 44 | 9% |
| Germany | 26 | 5% |
| Ireland | 19 | 4% |
| Japan | 12 | 2% |
| Australia | 11 | 2% |
| Spain | 10 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 8 | 2% |
| Canada | 8 | 2% |
| Other | 76 | 15% |
| Unknown | 189 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 285 | 55% |
| Scientists | 197 | 38% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 19 | 4% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 12 | 2% |
| Unknown | 2 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 466 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 466 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 76 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 72 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 51 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 44 | 9% |
| Other | 18 | 4% |
| Other | 66 | 14% |
| Unknown | 139 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 114 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 104 | 22% |
| Environmental Science | 19 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 51 | 11% |
| Unknown | 151 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 811. 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 21 March 2024.
All research outputs
#23,519
of 25,784,004 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#2,269
of 98,755 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,024
of 430,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#92
of 907 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,784,004 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 98,755 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 430,386 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 907 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.