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 |
A new dawn for the naming of fungi: impacts of decisions made in Melbourne in July 2011 on the future publication and regulation of fungal names
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
IMA Fungus, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.5598/imafungus.2011.02.02.06 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David L. Hawksworth |
| Abstract |
A personal synopsis of the decisions made at the Nomenclature Section meeting of the International Botanical Congress in Melbourne in July 2011 is provided, with an emphasis on those which will affect the working practices of, or will otherwise be of interest to, mycologists. The topics covered include the re-naming of the Code, the acceptance of English as an alternative to Latin for validating diagnoses, conditions for permitting electronic publication of names, mandatory deposit of key nomenclatural information in a recognized repository for the valid publication of fungal names, the discontinuance of dual nomenclature for pleomorphic fungi, clarification of the typification of sanctioned names, and acceptability of names originally published under the zoological code. Collectively, these changes are the most fundamental to have been enacted at a single Congress since the 1950s, and herald the dawn of a new era in the practice of fungal nomenclature. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 112 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 17 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 55 | 47% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 24 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 23 April 2023.
All research outputs
#5,446,210
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from IMA Fungus
#67
of 253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,042
of 154,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from IMA Fungus
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 253 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 154,032 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 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.