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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Phylogeography of mtDNA haplogroup R7 in the Indian peninsula
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ecology and Evolution, August 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2148-8-227 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gyaneshwer Chaubey, Monika Karmin, Ene Metspalu, Mait Metspalu, Deepa Selvi-Rani, Vijay Kumar Singh, Jüri Parik, Anu Solnik, B Prathap Naidu, Ajay Kumar, Niharika Adarsh, Chandana Basu Mallick, Bhargav Trivedi, Swami Prakash, Ramesh Reddy, Parul Shukla, Sanjana Bhagat, Swati Verma, Samiksha Vasnik, Imran Khan, Anshu Barwa, Dipti Sahoo, Archana Sharma, Mamoon Rashid, Vishal Chandra, Alla G Reddy, Antonio Torroni, Robert A Foley, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Lalji Singh, Toomas Kivisild, Richard Villems |
| Abstract |
Human genetic diversity observed in Indian subcontinent is second only to that of Africa. This implies an early settlement and demographic growth soon after the first 'Out-of-Africa' dispersal of anatomically modern humans in Late Pleistocene. In contrast to this perspective, linguistic diversity in India has been thought to derive from more recent population movements and episodes of contact. With the exception of Dravidian, which origin and relatedness to other language phyla is obscure, all the language families in India can be linked to language families spoken in different regions of Eurasia. Mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosome evidence has supported largely local evolution of the genetic lineages of the majority of Dravidian and Indo-European speaking populations, but there is no consensus yet on the question of whether the Munda (Austro-Asiatic) speaking populations originated in India or derive from a relatively recent migration from further East. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 2 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 87 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 30% |
| Researcher | 17 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 10% |
| Professor | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Unknown | 5 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 38 | 41% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 18 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 11 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 14 August 2021.
All research outputs
#2,863,657
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#760
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,529
of 98,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#7
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th 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 79% 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 98,411 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.