↓ Skip to main content

Advantages and disadvantages of molecular phylogenetics: a case study of ascaridoid nematodes.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nematology, December 1995
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
82 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
Advantages and disadvantages of molecular phylogenetics: a case study of ascaridoid nematodes.
Published in
Journal of Nematology, December 1995
Pubmed ID
Authors

S A Nadler

Abstract

The advantages of nucleotide sequence data for studying phylogeny have been shown to include number of potential characters available for comparison, rate independence between molecular and morphological evolution, and utility of molecular data for modeling patterns of nucleotide substitution. Potential pitfalls have also been revealed and include difficulties of inferring positional homology, incongruence between organismal and gene genealogies, and low likelihood of recovering the correct phylogeny given certain patterns in the timing of speciation events. Statistical methods for comparing phylogenetic hypotheses have been used to assess the reliability of alternative trees for ascaridoid nematodes. Based on partial ribosomal RNA sequences, tree topologies inconsistent with monophyly of the Ascaridinae were significantly worse by maximum likelihood inference. The topology of the maximum parsimony tree based on full-length sequences of 18S rRNA and 300 nucleotides of Cytochrome oxidase II for 13 ascaridoid species was generally consistent with traditional taxonomic expectations at lower ranks, but inconsistent with most proposed arrangements at higher taxonomic levels.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

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.
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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Unknown 78 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 26%
Student > Master 14 17%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Professor 3 4%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 14 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 9%
Environmental Science 5 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 2%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 15 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 June 2020.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nematology
#339
of 392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,611
of 79,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nematology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 392 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 79,765 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them