↓ Skip to main content

Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies) as a bridge between ecology and evolutionary genomics

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Zoology, October 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 (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 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
Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies) as a bridge between ecology and evolutionary genomics
Published in
Frontiers in Zoology, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12983-016-0176-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Seth Bybee, Alex Córdoba-Aguilar, M. Catherine Duryea, Ryo Futahashi, Bengt Hansson, M. Olalla Lorenzo-Carballa, Ruud Schilder, Robby Stoks, Anton Suvorov, Erik I. Svensson, Janne Swaegers, Yuma Takahashi, Phillip C. Watts, Maren Wellenreuther

Abstract

Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies) present an unparalleled insect model to integrate evolutionary genomics with ecology for the study of insect evolution. Key features of Odonata include their ancient phylogenetic position, extensive phenotypic and ecological diversity, several unique evolutionary innovations, ease of study in the wild and usefulness as bioindicators for freshwater ecosystems worldwide. In this review, we synthesize studies on the evolution, ecology and physiology of odonates, highlighting those areas where the integration of ecology with genomics would yield significant insights into the evolutionary processes that would not be gained easily by working on other animal groups. We argue that the unique features of this group combined with their complex life cycle, flight behaviour, diversity in ecological niches and their sensitivity to anthropogenic change make odonates a promising and fruitful taxon for genomics focused research. Future areas of research that deserve increased attention are also briefly outlined.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters 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 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Philippines 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Unknown 214 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 43 20%
Student > Master 39 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 17%
Researcher 22 10%
Professor 12 6%
Other 29 13%
Unknown 35 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 116 54%
Environmental Science 26 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 7%
Chemistry 4 2%
Neuroscience 3 1%
Other 10 5%
Unknown 41 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 19 February 2021.
All research outputs
#2,936,983
of 19,059,873 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Zoology
#186
of 608 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,395
of 280,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Zoology
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,059,873 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 608 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 280,646 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them