↓ Skip to main content

Artificial selection reveals the energetic expense of producing larger eggs

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Zoology, August 2016
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 (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Artificial selection reveals the energetic expense of producing larger eggs
Published in
Frontiers in Zoology, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12983-016-0172-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joel L. Pick, Pascale Hutter, Christina Ebneter, Ann-Kathrin Ziegler, Marta Giordano, Barbara Tschirren

Abstract

The amount of resources provided by the mother before birth has important and long-lasting effects on offspring fitness. Despite this, there is a large amount of variation in maternal investment seen in natural populations. Life-history theory predicts that this variation is maintained through a trade-off between the benefits of high maternal investment for the offspring and the costs of high investment for the mother. However, the proximate mechanisms underlying these costs of reproduction are not well understood. Here we used artificial selection for high and low maternal egg investment in a precocial bird, the Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica) to quantify costs of maternal reproductive investment. We show that females from the high maternal investment lines had significantly larger reproductive organs, which explained their overall larger body mass, and resulted in a higher resting metabolic rate (RMR). Contrary to our expectations, this increase in metabolic activity did not lead to a higher level of oxidative damage. This study is the first to provide experimental evidence for metabolic costs of increased per offspring investment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 37 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 26%
Student > Master 6 15%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 38%
Environmental Science 6 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 10%
Unspecified 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 9 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 23 August 2017.
All research outputs
#2,804,879
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Zoology
#178
of 652 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,790
of 342,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Zoology
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 652 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 342,845 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.