↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Article Metrics

Digitizing extant bat diversity: An open-access repository of 3D μCT-scanned skulls for research and education

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, September 2018
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
54 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Digitizing extant bat diversity: An open-access repository of 3D μCT-scanned skulls for research and education
Published in
PLoS ONE, September 2018
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0203022
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeff J. Shi, Erin P. Westeen, Daniel L. Rabosky

Abstract

Biological specimens are primary records of organismal ecology and history. As such, museum collections are invaluable repositories for testing ecological and evolutionary hypotheses across the tree of life. Digitizing and broadly sharing the phenotypic data from these collections serves to expand the traditional reach of museums, enabling widespread data sharing, collaboration, and education at an unprecedented scale. In recent years, μCT-scanning has been adopted as one way for efficiently digitizing museum specimens. Here, we describe a large repository of 3D, μCT-scanned images and surfaces of skulls from 359 extant species of bats, a highly diverse clade of modern vertebrates. This digital repository spans much of the taxonomic, biogeographic, and morphological diversity present across bats. All data have been published to the MorphoSource platform, an online database explicitly designed for the archiving of 3D morphological data. We demonstrate one potential use of this repository by testing for convergence in skull shape among one particularly diverse group of bats, the superfamily Noctilionoidea. Beyond its intrinsic utility to bat biologists, our digital specimens represent a resource for educators and for any researchers seeking to broadly test theories of trait evolution, functional ecology, and community assembly.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 54 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 20%
Student > Bachelor 3 20%
Other 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 40%
Unspecified 3 20%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 13%
Environmental Science 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Other 2 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 January 2019.
All research outputs
#276,655
of 12,369,399 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#5,577
of 135,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,102
of 262,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#78
of 1,143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,369,399 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 135,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 262,052 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,143 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 93% of its contemporaries.