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 |
What prevents Struthio camelus and Dromaius novaehollandiae (Palaeognathae) from choking? A novel anatomical mechanism in ratites, the linguo-laryngeal apparatus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Zoology, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1742-9994-9-11 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martina R Crole, John T Soley |
| Abstract |
The avian glottis channels air from the oropharynx to the trachea and is situated on an elevated structure, the laryngeal mound. It is imperative that the glottis be protected and closed during swallowing, which in mammals is achieved by covering the glottis with the epiglottis, as well as by adduction of the arytenoid cartilages. An epiglottis, however, is reportedly absent in birds. Ratites such as Struthio camelus and Dromaius novaehollandiae possess a very wide glottis in comparison to other birds. The question therefore arises as to how these large birds avoid inhalation of ingesta through a wide glottis, with apparently little protection, particularly as their feeding method involves throwing the food over the glottis to land in the proximal esophagus. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 33% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 40% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 20% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 20% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
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 12 June 2020.
All research outputs
#7,148,499
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Zoology
#340
of 695 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,533
of 179,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Zoology
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 695 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. 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 179,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.