↓ Skip to main content

Moving towards a complete molecular framework of the Nematoda: a focus on the Enoplida and early-branching clades

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, November 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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 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
Moving towards a complete molecular framework of the Nematoda: a focus on the Enoplida and early-branching clades
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, November 2010
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-10-353
Pubmed ID
Authors

Holly M Bik, P John D Lambshead, W Kelley Thomas, David H Lunt

Abstract

The subclass Enoplia (Phylum Nematoda) is purported to be the earliest branching clade amongst all nematode taxa, yet the deep phylogeny of this important lineage remains elusive. Free-living marine species within the order Enoplida play prominent roles in marine ecosystems, but previous molecular phylogenies have provided only the briefest evolutionary insights; this study aimed to firmly resolve internal relationships within the hyper-diverse but poorly understood Enoplida. In addition, we revisited the molecular framework of the Nematoda using a rigorous phylogenetic approach in order to investigate patterns of early splits amongst the oldest lineages (Dorylaimia and Enoplia).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 4 4%
United Kingdom 4 4%
Germany 2 2%
Mexico 2 2%
Sweden 1 1%
Korea, Republic of 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
Unknown 79 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Professor 7 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 7%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 13 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 59 63%
Environmental Science 9 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 14 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 March 2015.
All research outputs
#2,377,157
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#600
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,311
of 110,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 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 done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 110,145 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.