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 |
To signal or not to signal? Chemical communication by urine-borne signals mirrors sexual conflict in crayfish
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Biology, March 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7007-8-25 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fiona C Berry, Thomas Breithaupt |
| Abstract |
Sexual selection theory predicts that females, being the limiting sex, invest less in courtship signals than males. However, when chemical signals are involved it is often the female that initiates mating by producing stimuli that inform about sex and/or receptivity. This apparent contradiction has been discussed in the literature as 'the female pheromone fallacy'. Because the release of chemical stimuli may not have evolved to elicit the male's courtship response, whether these female stimuli represent signals remains an open question. Using techniques to visualise and block release of urine, we studied the role of urine signals during fighting and mating interactions of crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus). Test individuals were blindfolded to exclude visual disturbance from dye release and artificial urine introduction. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 1% |
| Croatia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 77 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 14 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 54 | 63% |
| Psychology | 6 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 1% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 14 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 15 June 2021.
All research outputs
#2,360,572
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from BMC Biology
#30
of 30 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,406
of 105,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Biology
#6
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 105,987 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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.