↓ Skip to main content

Edible Lepidoptera in Mexico: Geographic distribution, ethnicity, economic and nutritional importance for rural people

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#45 of 760)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 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
Edible Lepidoptera in Mexico: Geographic distribution, ethnicity, economic and nutritional importance for rural people
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, January 2011
DOI 10.1186/1746-4269-7-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julieta Ramos-Elorduy, José MP Moreno, Adolfo I Vázquez, Ivonne Landero, Héctor Oliva-Rivera, Víctor HM Camacho

Abstract

In this paper, we reported the butterflies and moths that are consumed in Mexico. We identified 67 species of Lepidoptera that are eaten principally in their larval stage in 17 states of Mexico. These species belong to 16 families: Arctiidae, Bombycidae, Castniidae, Cossidae, Geometridae, Hepialidae, Hesperiidae, Lasiocampidae, Noctuidae, Nymphalidae, Papilionidae, Pieridae, Pyralidae, Saturniidae, Sesiidae, and Sphingidae.Saturniidae, Pieridae, Noctuidae and Nymphalidae were the more species consumed with 16, 11, 9, and 8 species, respectively. The genera with the largest numbers of species were: Phassus, Phoebis, Hylesia and Spodoptera, with three species.Their local distribution, corresponding to each state of Mexico, is also presented.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 4 3%
Brazil 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 116 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 14 11%
Researcher 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Other 24 19%
Unknown 27 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 50 40%
Environmental Science 12 10%
Social Sciences 9 7%
Arts and Humanities 4 3%
Engineering 4 3%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 26 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 22 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,836,846
of 24,150,351 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#45
of 760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,219
of 187,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,150,351 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 187,651 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.