↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of neuromuscular development in two dinophilid species (Annelida) suggests progenetic origin of Dinophilus gyrociliatus

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Zoology, November 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 (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Comparison of neuromuscular development in two dinophilid species (Annelida) suggests progenetic origin of Dinophilus gyrociliatus
Published in
Frontiers in Zoology, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12983-016-0181-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexandra Kerbl, Elizaveta G. Fofanova, Tatiana D. Mayorova, Elena E. Voronezhskaya, Katrine Worsaae

Abstract

Several independent meiofaunal lineages are suggested to have originated through progenesis, however, morphological support for this heterochronous process is still lacking. Progenesis is defined as an arrest of somatic development (synchronously in various organ systems) due to early maturation, resulting in adults resembling larvae or juveniles of the ancestors. Accordingly, we established a detailed neuromuscular developmental atlas of two closely related Dinophilidae using immunohistochemistry and CLSM. This allows us to test for progenesis, questioning whether i) the adult smaller, dimorphic Dinophilus gyrociliatus resembles a younger developmental stage of the larger, monomorphic D. taeniatus and whether ii) dwarf males of D. gyrociliatus resemble an early developmental stage of D. gyrociliatus females. Both species form longitudinal muscle bundles first, followed by circular muscles, creating a grid of body wall musculature, which is the densest in adult D. taeniatus, while the architecture in adult female D. gyrociliatus resembles that of prehatching D. taeniatus. Both species display a subepidermal ganglionated nervous system with an anterior dorsal brain and five longitudinal ventral nerve bundles with six sets of segmental commissures (associated with paired ganglia). Neural differentiation of D. taeniatus and female D. gyrociliatus commissures occurs before hatching: both species start out forming one transverse neurite bundle per segment, which are thereafter joined by additional thin bundles. Whereas D. gyrociliatus arrests its development at this stage, adult D. taeniatus condenses the thin commissures again into one thick commissural bundle per segment. Generally, D. taeniatus adults demonstrate a seemingly more organized (= segmental) pattern of serotonin-like and FMRFamide-like immunoreactive elements. The dwarf male of D. gyrociliatus displays a highly aberrant neuromuscular system, showing no close resemblance to any early developmental stage of female Dinophilus, although the onset of muscular development mirrors the early myogenesis in females. The apparent synchronous arrest of nervous and muscular development in adult female D. gyrociliatus, resembling the prehatching stage of D. taeniatus, suggests that D. gyrociliatus have originated through progenesis. The synchrony in arrest of three organ systems, which show opposing reduction and addition of elements, presents one of the morphologically best-argued cases of progenesis within Spiralia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 26%
Student > Bachelor 5 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Other 1 4%
Librarian 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 January 2023.
All research outputs
#2,391,134
of 24,144,324 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Zoology
#151
of 674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,653
of 317,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Zoology
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,144,324 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 674 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 317,334 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.