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 |
Creating diversity in mammalian facial morphology: a review of potential developmental mechanisms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
EvoDevo, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13227-018-0103-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kaoru Usui, Masayoshi Tokita |
| Abstract |
Mammals (class Mammalia) have evolved diverse craniofacial morphology to adapt to a wide range of ecological niches. However, the genetic and developmental mechanisms underlying the diversification of mammalian craniofacial morphology remain largely unknown. In this paper, we focus on the facial length and orofacial clefts of mammals and deduce potential mechanisms that produced diversity in mammalian facial morphology. Small-scale changes in facial morphology from the common ancestor, such as slight changes in facial length and the evolution of the midline cleft in some lineages of bats, could be attributed to heterochrony in facial bone ossification. In contrast, large-scale changes of facial morphology from the common ancestor, such as a truncated, widened face as well as the evolution of the bilateral cleft possessed by some bat species, could be brought about by changes in growth and patterning of the facial primordium (the facial processes) at the early stages of embryogenesis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Australia | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 86 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 23% |
| Researcher | 15 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 12 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 35 | 41% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 16% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 5% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 16 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 September 2020.
All research outputs
#6,464,264
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from EvoDevo
#172
of 320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,944
of 328,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EvoDevo
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 320 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 328,563 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 2 of them.