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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Environmental quality alters female costs and benefits of evolving under enforced monogamy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ecology and Evolution, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2148-14-21 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vera M Grazer, Marco Demont, Łukasz Michalczyk, Matthew JG Gage, Oliver Y Martin |
| Abstract |
Currently many habitats suffer from quality loss due to environmental change. As a consequence, evolutionary trajectories might shift due to environmental effects and potentially increase extinction risk of resident populations. Nevertheless, environmental variation has rarely been incorporated in studies of sexual selection and sexual conflict, although local environments and individuals' condition undoubtedly influence costs and benefits. Here, we utilise polyandrous and monogamous selection lines of flour beetles, which evolved in presence or absence of sexual selection for 39 generations. We specifically investigated effects of low vs. standard food quality (i.e. stressful vs. benign environments) on reproductive success of cross pairs between beetles from the contrasting female and male selection histories to assess gender effects driving fitness. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Sweden | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 27% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 11 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 32 | 51% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 5% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 25 February 2023.
All research outputs
#6,930,354
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1,545
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,097
of 322,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#26
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 322,641 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 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 55% of its contemporaries.