↓ Skip to main content

Phylogeny and divergence of the pinnipeds (Carnivora: Mammalia) assessed using a multigene dataset

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, November 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
33 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
155 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
401 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Phylogeny and divergence of the pinnipeds (Carnivora: Mammalia) assessed using a multigene dataset
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, November 2007
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-7-216
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeff W Higdon, Olaf RP Bininda-Emonds, Robin MD Beck, Steven H Ferguson

Abstract

Phylogenetic comparative methods are often improved by complete phylogenies with meaningful branch lengths (e.g., divergence dates). This study presents a dated molecular supertree for all 34 world pinniped species derived from a weighted matrix representation with parsimony (MRP) supertree analysis of 50 gene trees, each determined under a maximum likelihood (ML) framework. Divergence times were determined by mapping the same sequence data (plus two additional genes) on to the supertree topology and calibrating the ML branch lengths against a range of fossil calibrations. We assessed the sensitivity of our supertree topology in two ways: 1) a second supertree with all mtDNA genes combined into a single source tree, and 2) likelihood-based supermatrix analyses. Divergence dates were also calculated using a Bayesian relaxed molecular clock with rate autocorrelation to test the sensitivity of our supertree results further.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 401 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 2%
Germany 7 2%
Brazil 7 2%
United Kingdom 5 1%
Chile 3 <1%
Mexico 3 <1%
India 3 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Other 9 2%
Unknown 354 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 78 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 66 16%
Student > Master 66 16%
Student > Bachelor 55 14%
Other 25 6%
Other 70 17%
Unknown 41 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 239 60%
Environmental Science 51 13%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 22 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 2%
Other 22 5%
Unknown 39 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 October 2023.
All research outputs
#7,778,510
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1,778
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,608
of 90,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#15
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th 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 51% 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 90,593 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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.