↓ Skip to main content

The homeodomain complement of the ctenophore Mnemiopsis leidyi suggests that Ctenophora and Porifera diverged prior to the ParaHoxozoa

Overview of attention for article published in EvoDevo, October 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#15 of 315)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
130 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
177 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
The homeodomain complement of the ctenophore Mnemiopsis leidyi suggests that Ctenophora and Porifera diverged prior to the ParaHoxozoa
Published in
EvoDevo, October 2010
DOI 10.1186/2041-9139-1-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph F Ryan, Kevin Pang, James C Mullikin, Mark Q Martindale, Andreas D Baxevanis

Abstract

The much-debated phylogenetic relationships of the five early branching metazoan lineages (Bilateria, Cnidaria, Ctenophora, Placozoa and Porifera) are of fundamental importance in piecing together events that occurred early in animal evolution. Comparisons of gene content between organismal lineages have been identified as a potentially useful methodology for phylogenetic reconstruction. However, these comparisons require complete genomes that, until now, did not exist for the ctenophore lineage. The homeobox superfamily of genes is particularly suited for these kinds of gene content comparisons, since it is large, diverse, and features a highly conserved domain.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
Germany 4 2%
Brazil 3 2%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Norway 2 1%
Spain 2 1%
France 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 153 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 24%
Researcher 36 20%
Student > Bachelor 23 13%
Student > Master 18 10%
Professor 11 6%
Other 27 15%
Unknown 19 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 103 58%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 33 19%
Neuroscience 6 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 2%
Environmental Science 3 2%
Other 6 3%
Unknown 22 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 22 May 2022.
All research outputs
#775,346
of 21,730,136 outputs
Outputs from EvoDevo
#15
of 315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,565
of 252,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EvoDevo
#2
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,730,136 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 252,605 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.