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 |
Evidence of positive selection associated with placental loss in tiger sharks
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ecology and Evolution, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12862-016-0696-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dominic G. Swift, Luke T. Dunning, Javier Igea, Edward J. Brooks, Catherine S. Jones, Leslie R. Noble, Adam Ciezarek, Emily Humble, Vincent Savolainen |
| Abstract |
All vertebrates initially feed their offspring using yolk reserves. In some live-bearing species these yolk reserves may be supplemented with extra nutrition via a placenta. Sharks belonging to the Carcharhinidae family are all live-bearing, and with the exception of the tiger shark (Galeocerdo cuvier), develop placental connections after exhausting yolk reserves. Phylogenetic relationships suggest the lack of placenta in tiger sharks is due to secondary loss. This represents a dramatic shift in reproductive strategy, and is likely to have left a molecular footprint of positive selection within the genome. We sequenced the transcriptome of the tiger shark and eight other live-bearing shark species. From this data we constructed a time-calibrated phylogenetic tree estimating the tiger shark lineage diverged from the placental carcharhinids approximately 94 million years ago. Along the tiger shark lineage, we identified five genes exhibiting a signature of positive selection. Four of these genes have functions likely associated with brain development (YWHAE and ARL6IP5) and sexual reproduction (VAMP4 and TCTEX1D2). Our results indicate the loss of placenta in tiger sharks may be associated with subsequent adaptive changes in brain development and sperm production. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 | 2 | 14% |
| Germany | 1 | 7% |
| Japan | 1 | 7% |
| France | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 9 | 64% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 43% |
| Scientists | 6 | 43% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 12% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 15 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 38 | 49% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 14% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 29 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,627,618
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#380
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,799
of 368,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#12
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 368,511 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.