↓ Skip to main content

Phylogenetic position of Loricifera inferred from nearly complete 18S and 28S rRNA gene sequences

Overview of attention for article published in Zoological Letters, June 2015
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 (#36 of 170)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
36 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 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
Phylogenetic position of Loricifera inferred from nearly complete 18S and 28S rRNA gene sequences
Published in
Zoological Letters, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40851-015-0017-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hiroshi Yamasaki, Shinta Fujimoto, Katsumi Miyazaki

Abstract

Loricifera is an enigmatic metazoan phylum; its morphology appeared to place it with Priapulida and Kinorhyncha in the group Scalidophora which, along with Nematoida (Nematoda and Nematomorpha), comprised the group Cycloneuralia. Scarce molecular data have suggested an alternative phylogenetic hypothesis, that the phylum Loricifera is a sister taxon to Nematomorpha, although the actual phylogenetic position of the phylum remains unclear. Ecdysozoan phylogeny was reconstructed through maximum-likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference (BI) analyses of nuclear 18S and 28S rRNA gene sequences from 60 species representing all eight ecdysozoan phyla, and including a newly collected loriciferan species. Ecdysozoa comprised two clades with high support values in both the ML and BI trees. One consisted of Priapulida and Kinorhyncha, and the other of Loricifera, Nematoida, and Panarthropoda (Tardigrada, Onychophora, and Arthropoda). The relationships between Loricifera, Nematoida, and Panarthropoda were not well resolved. Loricifera appears to be closely related to Nematoida and Panarthropoda, rather than grouping with Priapulida and Kinorhyncha, as had been suggested by previous studies. Thus, both Scalidophora and Cycloneuralia are a polyphyletic or paraphyletic groups. In addition, Loricifera and Nematomorpha did not emerge as sister groups.

X Demographics

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.
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 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 15 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 4%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 16 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 May 2023.
All research outputs
#2,262,060
of 23,197,711 outputs
Outputs from Zoological Letters
#36
of 170 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,862
of 263,636 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Zoological Letters
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,197,711 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 170 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 263,636 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.