↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

A revision of brain composition in Onychophora (velvet worms) suggests that the tritocerebrum evolved in arthropods

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Evolutionary Biology, January 2010
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 tweeters
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley

What is this page?

Summary Blogs Twitter Wikipedia
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
A revision of brain composition in Onychophora (velvet worms) suggests that the tritocerebrum evolved in arthropods
Published in
BMC Evolutionary Biology, January 2010
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-10-255
Pubmed ID
20727203
Authors

Georg Mayer, Paul M Whitington, Paul Sunnucks, Hans-Joachim Pflueger

Abstract

The composition of the arthropod head is one of the most contentious issues in animal evolution. In particular, controversy surrounds the homology and innervation of segmental cephalic appendages by the brain. Onychophora (velvet worms) play a crucial role in understanding the evolution of the arthropod brain, because they are close relatives of arthropods and have apparently changed little since the Early Cambrian. However, the segmental origins of their brain neuropils and the number of cephalic appendages innervated by the brain--key issues in clarifying brain composition in the last common ancestor of Onychophora and Arthropoda--remain unclear.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 4 4%
United States 3 3%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Australia 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
Colombia 1 1%
Unknown 80 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 22%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Master 9 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 5%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 13 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 60 65%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 8 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 1%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 15 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,390,423
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from BMC Evolutionary Biology
#551
of 2,907 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,352
of 163,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Evolutionary Biology
#19
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,907 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 163,605 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.