↓ Skip to main content

Updating the evolutionary history of Carnivora (Mammalia): a new species-level supertree complete with divergence time estimates

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Biology, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
33 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
52 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
324 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
558 Mendeley
citeulike
6 CiteULike
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
Updating the evolutionary history of Carnivora (Mammalia): a new species-level supertree complete with divergence time estimates
Published in
BMC Biology, February 2012
DOI 10.1186/1741-7007-10-12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katrin Nyakatura, Olaf RP Bininda-Emonds

Abstract

Although it has proven to be an important foundation for investigations of carnivoran ecology, biology and evolution, the complete species-level supertree for Carnivora of Bininda-Emonds et al. is showing its age. Additional, largely molecular sequence data are now available for many species and the advancement of computer technology means that many of the limitations of the original analysis can now be avoided. We therefore sought to provide an updated estimate of the phylogenetic relationships within all extant Carnivora, again using supertree analysis to be able to analyze as much of the global phylogenetic database for the group as possible.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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 558 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 7 1%
Brazil 7 1%
Germany 5 <1%
Denmark 3 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Other 8 1%
Unknown 518 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 97 17%
Researcher 97 17%
Student > Bachelor 89 16%
Student > Master 79 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 34 6%
Other 96 17%
Unknown 66 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 315 56%
Environmental Science 48 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 42 8%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 34 6%
Social Sciences 6 1%
Other 30 5%
Unknown 83 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 51. 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 13 January 2023.
All research outputs
#707,043
of 23,052,509 outputs
Outputs from BMC Biology
#173
of 2,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,339
of 156,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Biology
#4
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,052,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,011 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 156,167 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.