↓ Skip to main content

In defence of the three-domains of life paradigm

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
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
In defence of the three-domains of life paradigm
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12862-017-1059-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

P.T.S. van der Gulik, W.D. Hoff, D. Speijer

Abstract

Recently, important discoveries regarding the archaeon that functioned as the "host" in the merger with a bacterium that led to the eukaryotes, its "complex" nature, and its phylogenetic relationship to eukaryotes, have been reported. Based on these new insights proposals have been put forward to get rid of the three-domain Model of life, and replace it with a two-domain model. We present arguments (both regarding timing, complexity, and chemical nature of specific evolutionary processes, as well as regarding genetic structure) to resist such proposals. The three-domain Model represents an accurate description of the differences at the most fundamental level of living organisms, as the eukaryotic lineage that arose from this unique merging event is distinct from both Archaea and Bacteria in a myriad of crucial ways. We maintain that "a natural system of organisms", as proposed when the three-domain Model of life was introduced, should not be revised when considering the recent discoveries, however exciting they may be.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Master 7 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 17 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 19 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 2018.
All research outputs
#2,075,187
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#509
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,050
of 325,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#10
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 86% 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 325,249 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.