↓ Skip to main content

The Distributions and Boundary of Two Distinct, Local Forms of Japanese Pond Frog, Pelophylax porosus brevipodus, Inferred From Sequences of Mitochondrial DNA

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
The Distributions and Boundary of Two Distinct, Local Forms of Japanese Pond Frog, Pelophylax porosus brevipodus, Inferred From Sequences of Mitochondrial DNA
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, April 2018
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2018.00079
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yukari Nagai, Toshio Doi, Kunio Ito, Yoshiaki Yuasa, Takeshi Fujitani, Jun-ichi Naito, Mitsuaki Ogata, Ikuo Miura

Abstract

The Nagoya Daruma pond frog Pelophylax porosus brevipodus is distributed in western Japan and is traditionally divided into two local forms: the Okayama form in the west and the Nagoya form in the east. These two forms are genetically differentiated, but have never been defined taxonomically because their distributions are unclear to date. To complete the distributions and identify the boundary of the two forms, we genetically investigated 16 populations including eight populations located within the unexamined area. We found that the distributional boundary is located within a small area of Hyogo Prefecture where haplotypes of mitochondrial cytochrome b (cytb) and D-loop region corresponding to the two forms co-existed. On the other hand, the polymorphic site of the nuclear gene SOX3 revealed introgression over the boundary into Okayama cytb clade. These results suggest that the two forms were geographically isolated from each other in the past, and secondarily contacted and then accepted one-way introgression. As a next step of the research, taxonomic approach is expected to define the two forms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 63%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Environmental Science 1 6%
Unknown 4 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 16 January 2019.
All research outputs
#5,455,565
of 25,425,223 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#1,710
of 13,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,775
of 343,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#31
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,425,223 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 343,477 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.