↓ Skip to main content

Micromechanics of Sea Urchin Spines

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2012
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Micromechanics of Sea Urchin Spines
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0044140
Pubmed ID
Authors

Naomi Tsafnat, John D. Fitz Gerald, Hai N. Le, Zbigniew H. Stachurski

Abstract

The endoskeletal structure of the Sea Urchin, Centrostephanus rodgersii, has numerous long spines whose known functions include locomotion, sensing, and protection against predators. These spines have a remarkable internal microstructure and are made of single-crystal calcite. A finite-element model of the spine's unique porous structure, based on micro-computed tomography (microCT) and incorporating anisotropic material properties, was developed to study its response to mechanical loading. Simulations show that high stress concentrations occur at certain points in the spine's architecture; brittle cracking would likely initiate in these regions. These analyses demonstrate that the organization of single-crystal calcite in the unique, intricate morphology of the sea urchin spine results in a strong, stiff and lightweight structure that enhances its strength despite the brittleness of its constituent material.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 82 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 23%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Master 10 12%
Other 4 5%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 7 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 31%
Engineering 15 18%
Materials Science 13 15%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 6%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 14 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 14 April 2015.
All research outputs
#2,586,370
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#32,716
of 193,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,987
of 168,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#566
of 4,262 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,568 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 168,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,262 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.