↓ Skip to main content

Diversification and reproductive isolation: cryptic species in the only New World high-duty cycle bat, Pteronotus parnellii

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
172 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
Diversification and reproductive isolation: cryptic species in the only New World high-duty cycle bat, Pteronotus parnellii
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-13-26
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth L Clare, Amanda M Adams, Aline Z Maya-Simões, Judith L Eger, Paul DN Hebert, M Brock Fenton

Abstract

Molecular techniques are increasingly employed to recognize the presence of cryptic species, even among commonly observed taxa. Previous studies have demonstrated that bats using high-duty cycle echolocation may be more likely to speciate quickly. Pteronotus parnellii is a widespread Neotropical bat and the only New World species to use high-duty cycle echolocation, a trait otherwise restricted to Old World taxa. Here we analyze morphological and acoustic variation and genetic divergence at the mitochondrial COI gene, the 7th intron region of the y-linked Dby gene and the nuclear recombination-activating gene 2, and provide extensive evidence that P. parnellii is actually a cryptic species complex.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 4 2%
Germany 2 1%
France 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Canada 2 1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 156 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 19%
Student > Master 31 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 16%
Student > Bachelor 24 14%
Other 10 6%
Other 30 17%
Unknown 17 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 125 73%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 7%
Environmental Science 7 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 <1%
Other 4 2%
Unknown 20 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 28 May 2020.
All research outputs
#6,372,943
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1,381
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,620
of 290,742 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#24
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 290,742 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 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 66% of its contemporaries.