↓ Skip to main content

Selfishness, warfare, and economics; or integration, cooperation, and biology

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, January 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 (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
reddit
2 Redditors

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Selfishness, warfare, and economics; or integration, cooperation, and biology
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fcimb.2012.00054
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emiliano Salvucci

Abstract

The acceptance of Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection is not complete and it has been pointed out its limitation to explain the complex processes that constitute the transformation of species. It is necessary to discuss the explaining power of the dominant paradigm. It is common that new discoveries bring about contradictions that are intended to be overcome by adjusting results to the dominant reductionist paradigm using all sorts of gradations and combinations that are admitted for each case. In addition to the discussion on the validity of natural selection, modern findings represent a challenge to the interpretation of the observations with the Darwinian view of competition and struggle for life as theoretical basis. New holistic interpretations are emerging related to the Net of Life, in which the interconnection of ecosystems constitutes a dynamic and self-regulating biosphere: viruses are recognized as a macroorganism with a huge collection of genes, most unknown that constitute the major planet's gene pool. They play a fundamental role in evolution since their sequences are capable of integrating into the genomes in an "infective" way and become an essential part of multicellular organisms. They have content with "biological sense" i.e., they appear as part of normal life processes and have a serious role as carrier elements of complex genetic information. Antibiotics are cell signals with main effects on general metabolism and transcription on bacterial cells and communities. The hologenome theory considers an organism and all of its associated symbiotic microbes (parasites, mutualists, synergists, amensalists) as a result of symbiopoiesis. Microbes, helmints, that are normally understood as parasites are cohabitants and they have cohabited with their host and drive the evolution and existence of the partners. Each organism is the result of integration of complex systems. The eukaryotic organism is the result of combination of bacterial, virus, and eukaryotic DNA and it is the result of the interaction of its own genome with the genome of its microbiota, and their metabolism are intertwined (as a "superorganism") along evolution. The darwinian paradigm had its origin in the free market theories and concepts of Malthus and Spencer. Then, nature was explained on the basis of market theories moving away from an accurate explanation of natural phenomena. It is necessary to acknowledge the limitations of the dominant dogma. These new interpretations about biological processes, molecules, roles of viruses in nature, and microbial interactions are remarkable points to be considered in order to construct a solid theory adjusted to the facts and with less speculations and tortuous semantic traps.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 4%
United States 2 3%
Norway 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
Unknown 62 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 21%
Student > Bachelor 14 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 18%
Student > Master 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 13 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Psychology 3 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 16 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 30 April 2022.
All research outputs
#4,938,917
of 23,940,484 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#1,001
of 7,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,516
of 250,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#24
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,940,484 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,188 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 250,252 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.