↓ Skip to main content

Alloparenting for chimpanzee twins

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
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
Alloparenting for chimpanzee twins
Published in
Scientific Reports, September 2014
DOI 10.1038/srep06306
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takeshi Kishimoto, Juko Ando, Seiki Tatara, Nobuhiro Yamada, Katsuya Konishi, Natsuko Kimura, Akira Fukumori, Masaki Tomonaga

Abstract

In April 2009, a female chimpanzee named Sango, living in a captive group at the Noichi Zoo, Japan, gave birth to dizygotic male-female twin chimpanzees (male: Daiya, female: Sakura). The extent to which adult group members cared for the twins was investigated using a focal animal sampling method targeting six adults (one male) when the twin chimpanzees were two years old. Data were collected for an average of 6.78 h (SD = 0.79) per focal participant. An unaffiliated female adult of Sango was engaged in parenting Sakura as much as Sango. Given that Sakura was in lesser proximity to Sango than Daiya, Sakura's departures from her mother and her ability to gesture requests might have enabled non-kin adults to provide her care.

X Demographics

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

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 %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Japan 1 3%
Hungary 1 3%
Unknown 26 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 24%
Researcher 7 24%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 34%
Psychology 6 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 June 2021.
All research outputs
#2,727,806
of 23,202,641 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#23,364
of 125,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,785
of 239,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#115
of 700 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,202,641 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 125,447 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 239,542 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 700 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.