↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Article Metrics

Ancient European dog genomes reveal continuity since the Early Neolithic

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, July 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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
106 news outlets
blogs
13 blogs
twitter
156 tweeters
facebook
17 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
3 Google+ users
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
90 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
253 Mendeley
Title
Ancient European dog genomes reveal continuity since the Early Neolithic
Published in
Nature Communications, July 2017
DOI 10.1038/ncomms16082
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura R. Botigué, Shiya Song, Amelie Scheu, Shyamalika Gopalan, Amanda L. Pendleton, Matthew Oetjens, Angela M. Taravella, Timo Seregély, Andrea Zeeb-Lanz, Rose-Marie Arbogast, Dean Bobo, Kevin Daly, Martina Unterländer, Joachim Burger, Jeffrey M. Kidd, Krishna R. Veeramah

Abstract

Europe has played a major role in dog evolution, harbouring the oldest uncontested Palaeolithic remains and having been the centre of modern dog breed creation. Here we sequence the genomes of an Early and End Neolithic dog from Germany, including a sample associated with an early European farming community. Both dogs demonstrate continuity with each other and predominantly share ancestry with modern European dogs, contradicting a previously suggested Late Neolithic population replacement. We find no genetic evidence to support the recent hypothesis proposing dual origins of dog domestication. By calibrating the mutation rate using our oldest dog, we narrow the timing of dog domestication to 20,000-40,000 years ago. Interestingly, we do not observe the extreme copy number expansion of the AMY2B gene characteristic of modern dogs that has previously been proposed as an adaptation to a starch-rich diet driven by the widespread adoption of agriculture in the Neolithic.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 156 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 253 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 252 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 56 22%
Researcher 46 18%
Student > Bachelor 41 16%
Student > Master 38 15%
Other 15 6%
Other 35 14%
Unknown 22 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 97 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 49 19%
Arts and Humanities 18 7%
Social Sciences 13 5%
Psychology 9 4%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 40 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1029. 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 14 July 2020.
All research outputs
#5,738
of 15,626,247 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#105
of 29,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191
of 267,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#5
of 902 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,626,247 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,702 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 49.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 267,823 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 902 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.