↓ Skip to main content

Mandible evolution in the Scarabaeinae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) and adaptations to coprophagous habits

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Zoology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Mandible evolution in the Scarabaeinae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) and adaptations to coprophagous habits
Published in
Frontiers in Zoology, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12983-015-0123-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ming Bai, Sha Li, Yuanyuan Lu, Haidong Yang, Yijie Tong, Xingke Yang

Abstract

The astonishing spectrum of scarabaeine lifestyles makes them an attractive group for studies in entomology and evolutionary biology. As a result of adaptions to specific food substrates and textures, the mouthparts of dung beetles, particularly the mandible, have undergone considerable evolutionary changes and differ distinctly from the presumptive ancestral conditions of the Coleoptera and Polyphaga. The possible functions of dung beetle mouthparts and the evolution of dung feeding have been controversial for decades. In this study, 187 scarabs representing all tribes of the Scarabaeinae and the major lineages within the Scarabaeoidea, along with three major feeding types within the Scarabaeoidea (omnivory, phytophagy and coprophagy), were studied. Based on geometric morphometric and three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction approaches, morphological differences in mandibles among the three feeding types were identified. The ancestral forms of the mandible within the Scarabaeinae were reconstructed and compared with those of modern species. The most recent common ancestor of the Scarabaeinae fed on soft materials, and the ancestor of the Scarabaeinae and the Aphodiinae was in an evolutionary transition between processing more solid and softer substrates. Coprophagy originated from omnivorous ancestors that were very likely saprophagous. Furthermore, phytophagy may also have originated from omnivory. In addition, our study addresses the integration and modularity of geometric morphometric data in a phylogenetic context.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Master 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 16 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 54%
Environmental Science 3 5%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 17 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 March 2022.
All research outputs
#6,624,176
of 23,414,653 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Zoology
#336
of 660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,484
of 286,070 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Zoology
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,414,653 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 286,070 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.