↓ Skip to main content

Algorithmic approaches to aid species' delimitation in multidimensional morphospace

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Evolutionary Biology, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
156 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Algorithmic approaches to aid species' delimitation in multidimensional morphospace
Published in
BMC Evolutionary Biology, January 2010
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-10-175
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas HG Ezard, Paul N Pearson, Andy Purvis

Abstract

The species is a fundamental unit of biological pattern and process, but its delimitation has proven a ready source of argument and disagreement. Here, we discuss four key steps that utilize statistical thresholds to describe the morphological variability within a sample and hence assess whether there is evidence for one or multiple species. Once the initial set of biologically relevant traits on comparable individuals has been identified, there is no need for the investigator to hypothesise how specimens might be divided among groups, nor the traits on which groups might be separated.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Australia 3 2%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Brazil 3 2%
Argentina 2 1%
Mexico 2 1%
Czechia 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 131 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 49 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 20%
Student > Master 18 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Student > Bachelor 9 6%
Other 32 21%
Unknown 8 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 95 61%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 27 17%
Environmental Science 9 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Philosophy 2 1%
Other 5 3%
Unknown 14 9%

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 06 November 2012.
All research outputs
#2,307,401
of 4,507,280 outputs
Outputs from BMC Evolutionary Biology
#979
of 1,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,580
of 81,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Evolutionary Biology
#19
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,431 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 81,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.