↓ Skip to main content

Evolutionary and developmental understanding of the spinal accessory nerve

Overview of attention for article published in Zoological Letters, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Evolutionary and developmental understanding of the spinal accessory nerve
Published in
Zoological Letters, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40851-014-0006-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Motoki N Tada, Shigeru Kuratani

Abstract

The vertebrate spinal accessory nerve (SAN) innervates the cucullaris muscle, the major muscle of the neck, and is recognized as a synapomorphy that defines living jawed vertebrates. Morphologically, the cucullaris muscle exists between the branchiomeric series of muscles innervated by special visceral efferent neurons and the rostral somitic muscles innervated by general somatic efferent neurons. The category to which the SAN belongs to both developmentally and evolutionarily has long been controversial. To clarify this, we assessed the innervation and cytoarchitecture of the spinal nerve plexus in the lamprey and reviewed studies of SAN in various species of vertebrates and their embryos. We then reconstructed an evolutionary sequence in which phylogenetic changes in developmental neuronal patterning led towards the gnathostome-specific SAN. We hypothesize that the SAN arose as part of a lamprey-like spinal nerve plexus that innervates the cyclostome-type infraoptic muscle, a candidate cucullaris precursor.

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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 27%
Student > Master 7 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 15%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 8%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 9 19%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 December 2023.
All research outputs
#6,607,628
of 24,967,663 outputs
Outputs from Zoological Letters
#88
of 180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,426
of 364,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Zoological Letters
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,967,663 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 364,855 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 76% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.