↓ Skip to main content

Early members of ‘living fossil’ lineage imply later origin of modern ray-finned fishes

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
129 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
10 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
87 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 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
Early members of ‘living fossil’ lineage imply later origin of modern ray-finned fishes
Published in
Nature, August 2017
DOI 10.1038/nature23654
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sam Giles, Guang-Hui Xu, Thomas J. Near, Matt Friedman

Abstract

Modern ray-finned fishes (Actinopterygii) comprise half of extant vertebrate species and are widely thought to have originated before or near the end of the Middle Devonian epoch (around 385 million years ago). Polypterids (bichirs and ropefish) represent the earliest-diverging lineage of living actinopterygians, with almost all Palaeozoic taxa interpreted as more closely related to other extant actinopterygians than to polypterids. By contrast, the earliest material assigned to the polypterid lineage is mid-Cretaceous in age (around 100 million years old), implying a quarter-of-a-billion-year palaeontological gap. Here we show that scanilepiforms, a widely distributed radiation from the Triassic period (around 252-201 million years ago), are stem polypterids. Importantly, these fossils break the long polypterid branch and expose many supposedly primitive features of extant polypterids as reversals. This shifts numerous Palaeozoic ray-fins to the actinopterygian stem, reducing the minimum age for the crown lineage by roughly 45 million years. Recalibration of molecular clocks to exclude phylogenetically reassigned Palaeozoic taxa results in estimates that the actinopterygian crown lineage is about 20-40 million years younger than was indicated by previous molecular analyses. These new dates are broadly consistent with our revised palaeontological timescale and coincident with an interval of conspicuous morphological and taxonomic diversification among ray-fins centred on the Devonian-Carboniferous boundary. A shifting timescale, combined with ambiguity in the relationships of late Palaeozoic actinopterygians, highlights this part of the fossil record as a major frontier in understanding the evolutionary assembly of modern vertebrate diversity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 129 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 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 126 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 20%
Researcher 25 20%
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 8%
Other 26 21%
Unknown 17 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 49%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 14 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 7%
Environmental Science 6 5%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 25 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 157. 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 28 February 2024.
All research outputs
#278,642
of 26,549,961 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#15,324
of 100,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,639
of 329,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#279
of 834 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,549,961 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 100,919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 103.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 329,062 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 834 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 66% of its contemporaries.