↓ Skip to main content

Unraveling the origin of Cladocera by identifying heterochrony in the developmental sequences of Branchiopoda

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Zoology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Unraveling the origin of Cladocera by identifying heterochrony in the developmental sequences of Branchiopoda
Published in
Frontiers in Zoology, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1742-9994-10-35
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin Fritsch, Olaf RP Bininda-Emonds, Stefan Richter

Abstract

One of the most interesting riddles within crustaceans is the origin of Cladocera (water fleas). Cladocerans are morphologically diverse and in terms of size and body segmentation differ considerably from other branchiopod taxa (Anostraca, Notostraca, Laevicaudata, Spinicaudata and Cyclestherida). In 1876, the famous zoologist Carl Claus proposed with regard to their origin that cladocerans might have evolved from a precociously maturing larva of a clam shrimp-like ancestor which was able to reproduce at this early stage of development. In order to shed light on this shift in organogenesis and to identify (potential) changes in the chronology of development (heterochrony), we investigated the external and internal development of the ctenopod Penilia avirostris and compared it to development in representatives of Anostraca, Notostraca, Laevicaudata, Spinicaudata and Cyclestherida. The development of the nervous system was investigated using immunohistochemical labeling and confocal microscopy. External morphological development was followed using a scanning electron microscope and confocal microscopy to detect the autofluorescence of the external cuticle.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 3%
Denmark 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
Unknown 56 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 20%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Master 4 7%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 6 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 67%
Environmental Science 6 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 7 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 June 2013.
All research outputs
#7,036,960
of 9,233,965 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Zoology
#351
of 407 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,326
of 126,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Zoology
#14
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,233,965 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 407 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 126,912 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.