↓ Skip to main content

Phylogenomic analysis of Copepoda (Arthropoda, Crustacea) reveals unexpected similarities with earlier proposed morphological phylogenies

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2017
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
Phylogenomic analysis of Copepoda (Arthropoda, Crustacea) reveals unexpected similarities with earlier proposed morphological phylogenies
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12862-017-0883-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Seong-il Eyun

Abstract

Copepods play a critical role in marine ecosystems but have been poorly investigated in phylogenetic studies. Morphological evidence supports the monophyly of copepods, whereas interordinal relationships continue to be debated. In particular, the phylogenetic position of the order Harpacticoida is still ambiguous and inconsistent among studies. Until now, a small number of molecular studies have been done using only a limited number or even partial genes and thus there is so far no consensus at the order-level. This study attempted to resolve phylogenetic relationships among and within four major copepod orders including Harpacticoida and the phylogenetic position of Copepoda among five other crustacean groups (Anostraca, Cladocera, Sessilia, Amphipoda, and Decapoda) using 24 nuclear protein-coding genes. Phylogenomics has confirmed the monophyly of Copepoda and Podoplea. However, this study reveals surprising differences with the majority of the copepod phylogenies and unexpected similarities with postembryonic characters and earlier proposed morphological phylogenies; More precisely, Cyclopoida is more closely related to Siphonostomatoida than to Harpacticoida which is likely the most basally-branching group of Podoplea. Divergence time estimation suggests that the origin of Harpacticoida can be traced back to the Devonian, corresponding well with recently discovered fossil evidence. Copepoda has a close affinity to the clade of Malacostraca and Thecostraca but not to Branchiopoda. This result supports the hypothesis of the newly proposed clades, Communostraca, Multicrustacea, and Allotriocarida but further challenges the validity of Hexanauplia and Vericrustacea. The first phylogenomic study of Copepoda provides new insights into taxonomic relationships and represents a valuable resource that improves our understanding of copepod evolution and their wide range of ecological adaptations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 18%
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 21 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 51 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 19%
Environmental Science 6 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 2%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 24 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 28 November 2017.
All research outputs
#2,714,717
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#715
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,184
of 420,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#20
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 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 80% 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 420,482 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 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 70% of its contemporaries.