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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Nomenclature and placental mammal phylogeny
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ecology and Evolution, April 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2148-10-102 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert J Asher, Kristofer M Helgen |
| Abstract |
An issue arising from recent progress in establishing the placental mammal Tree of Life concerns the nomenclature of high-level clades. Fortunately, there are now several well-supported clades among extant mammals that require unambiguous, stable names. Although the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature does not apply above the Linnean rank of family, and while consensus on the adoption of competing systems of nomenclature does not yet exist, there is a clear, historical basis upon which to arbitrate among competing names for high-level mammalian clades. Here, we recommend application of the principles of priority and stability, as laid down by G.G. Simpson in 1945, to discriminate among proposed names for high-level taxa. We apply these principles to specific cases among placental mammals with broad relevance for taxonomy, and close with particular emphasis on the Afrotherian family Tenrecidae. We conclude that no matter how reconstructions of the Tree of Life change in years to come, systematists should apply new names reluctantly, deferring to those already published and maximizing consistency with existing nomenclature. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 207 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | 4% |
| Brazil | 3 | 1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Argentina | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | 1% |
| Unknown | 183 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 59 | 29% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 36 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 27 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 34 | 16% |
| Unknown | 23 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 143 | 69% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 19 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 8 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 3% |
| Unknown | 20 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 29 October 2023.
All research outputs
#2,485,212
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#639
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,045
of 103,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#6
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 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 82% 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 103,973 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.