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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The concept of the sexual reproduction cycle and its evolutionary significance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2015.00011 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shu-Nong Bai |
| Abstract |
The concept of a "sexual reproduction cycle (SRC)" was first proposed by Bai and Xu (2013) to describe the integration of meiosis, sex differentiation, and fertilization. This review discusses the evolutionary and scientific implications of considering these three events as part of a single process. Viewed in this way, the SRC is revealed to be a mechanism for efficiently increasing genetic variation, facilitating adaptation to environmental challenges. It also becomes clear that, in terms of cell proliferation, it is appropriate to contrast mitosis with the entire SRC, rather than with meiosis alone. Evolutionarily, it appears that the SRC was first established in unicellular eukaryotes and that all multicellular organisms evolved within that framework. This concept provides a new perspective into how sexual reproduction evolved, how generations should be defined, and how developmental processes of various multicellular organisms should properly be compared. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 1 | 17% |
| Spain | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 24% |
| Researcher | 11 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 7 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 23 | 47% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 20% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 April 2022.
All research outputs
#2,377,987
of 23,571,271 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#1,048
of 21,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,948
of 354,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#7
of 212 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,571,271 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 21,656 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 354,412 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 212 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.