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 |
Descriptive attributes used in the characterization of stingless bees (Apidae: Meliponini) in rural populations of the Atlantic forest (Misiones-Argentina)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-4269-8-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fernando Zamudio, Norma I Hilgert |
| Abstract |
Human beings employ a combination of morphological, sensorial, utilitarian, cultural and ecological characters when they identify and classify organisms. Ethnotaxonomy has provided a store of information about the characters cultures employ when they identify and classify a vast diversity of taxonomic groups. Nevertheless, some more research is needed to provide a comparison of the characters employed in the description of taxons, and an analysis of the extent to which those descriptors are represented. Stingless bees constitute a diverse group of social insects that have been widely studied from an ethnobiological perspective due to their utilitarian and cultural importance. The objective of this study is to identify the elements local people consider when characterizing stingless bees, and how important these elements are in the study of local classifications. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 2 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Argentina | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 17% |
| Researcher | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 22% |
| Unknown | 10 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 32 | 49% |
| Environmental Science | 8 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 12 | 18% |
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 09 May 2012.
All research outputs
#3,529,822
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#118
of 730 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,303
of 250,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 730 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 250,214 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 87% 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 63% of its contemporaries.