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 |
Evolution of Climatic Related Leaf Traits in the Family Nothofagaceae
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2018.01073 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nataly Glade-Vargas, Luis F. Hinojosa, Marcelo Leppe |
| Abstract |
The current relationship between leaf traits and environmental variables has been widely used as a proxy for climate estimates. However, it has been observed that the phylogenetic relationships between taxa also influence the evolution of climatic related leaf traits, implying that the direct use of the physiognomy-climate relation should be corrected by their ancestor-descendant relations. Here, we analyze the variation of 20 leaf traits during the evolution of 27 species in the Gondwana family Nothofagaceae. We evaluate whether the evolution of these traits is exclusively associated with past climate variations or whether they are restricted by phylogenetic relationships. Our results indicate that four leaf traits, associated with size and shape, had consistently a phylogenetic independent evolution, suggesting adaptive variation with the environment. While three of the traits, presented consistently phylogenetic signal and fit a Brownian motion or Ornstein-Uhlenbeck model of evolution, suggesting that the evolution of these traits is restrained by phylogenetic relationships and implying that phylogenetic corrections should be made for the family Nothofagaceae to use them as climatic proxy. Finally, this study highlights the importance of evaluating the evolutionary history of climatic related leaf traits before conducting paleoclimate estimates. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 2 | 29% |
| Mexico | 2 | 29% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 6 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 47% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 12% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
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 13 March 2023.
All research outputs
#5,181,047
of 25,225,182 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#2,765
of 24,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,644
of 336,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#87
of 482 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,225,182 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,264 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 336,810 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 482 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.