↓ Skip to main content

Decay of velvet worms (Onychophora), and bias in the fossil record of lobopodians

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, November 2014
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Decay of velvet worms (Onychophora), and bias in the fossil record of lobopodians
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12862-014-0222-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Duncan JE Murdock, Sarah E Gabbott, Georg Mayer, Mark A Purnell

Abstract

BackgroundFossil lobopodians, including animals proposed to have close affinity to modern onychophorans, are crucial to understanding the evolution of the panarthropod body plan and the phylum-level relationships between the ecdysozoan groups. Unfortunately, the key features of their anatomy are un-mineralized and subject to biases introduced during death, decay and preservation, yet the extent to which these fossils have been affected by the processes of post-mortem decay is entirely untested. Recent experimental work on chordates has highlighted a profound bias caused by decay, resulting in the erroneous interpretation of badly decayed specimens as primitive members of a clade (stemward slippage). The degree to which this bias affects organisms other than chordates is unknown.ResultsHere we use experimental decay of velvet worms (Onychophora) to examine the importance of decay bias in fossil lobopodians. Although we find stemward slippage is not significant in the interpretation of non-mineralized lobopodian fossils, the affect of decay is far from unbiased. Quantitative analysis reveals significant changes in body proportions during decay, a spectrum of decay resistance across anatomical features, and correlated decay of topologically associated characters.ConclusionsThese results have significant implications for the interpretation of fossil lobopodian remains, demonstrating that features such as body outline and relative proportions are unreliable for taxonomy or phylogenetic reconstruction, unless decay is taken into account. Similarly, the non-independent loss of characters, due to juxtaposition in the body, during decay has the potential to bias phylogenetic analyses of non-biomineralized fossils. Our results are difficult to reconcile with interpretations of highly decay-prone tissues and structures, such as neural tissue, and complex musculature, in recently described Cambrian lobopodians. More broadly, we hypothesize that stemward slippage is unlikely to be a significant factor among the taphonomic biases that have affected organisms where decay-resistant features of the anatomy are rich in phylogenetically informative characters. Conversely, organisms which possess decay-resistant body parts but have informative characters concentrated in decay-prone tissues will be just as liable to bias as those that lack decay-resistant body parts. Further experimental analysis of decay is required to test these hypotheses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 4%
United Kingdom 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 47 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Student > Master 10 20%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 3 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 41%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 17 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 10%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 11 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,755,726
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#729
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,285
of 369,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#12
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% 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 80% 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 369,658 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.