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 |
On the probability of dinosaur fleas
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12862-015-0568-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katharina Dittmar, Qiyun Zhu, Michael W. Hastriter, Michael F. Whiting |
| Abstract |
Recently, a set of publications described flea fossils from Jurassic and Early Cretaceous geological strata in northeastern China, which were suggested to have parasitized feathered dinosaurs, pterosaurs, and early birds or mammals. In support of these fossils being fleas, a recent publication in BMC Evolutionary Biology described the extended abdomen of a female fossil specimen as due to blood feeding.We here comment on these findings, and conclude that the current interpretation of the evolutionary trajectory and ecology of these putative dinosaur fleas is based on appeal to probability, rather than evidence. Hence, their taxonomic positioning as fleas, or stem fleas, as well as their ecological classification as ectoparasites and blood feeders is not supported by currently available data. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 | 4 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 19% |
| Mexico | 1 | 6% |
| Portugal | 1 | 6% |
| Germany | 1 | 6% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 63% |
| Scientists | 5 | 31% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 21% |
| Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 9 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 6 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 06 April 2024.
All research outputs
#4,254,590
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1,089
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,619
of 400,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#17
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 400,967 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.