↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

Species mtDNA genetic diversity explained by infrapopulation size in a host‐symbiont system

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology and Evolution, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Species mtDNA genetic diversity explained by infrapopulation size in a host‐symbiont system
Published in
Ecology and Evolution, November 2015
DOI 10.1002/ece3.1842
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jorge Doña, Marina Moreno‐García, Charles D. Criscione, David Serrano, Roger Jovani

Abstract

Understanding what shapes variation in genetic diversity among species remains a major challenge in evolutionary ecology, and it has been seldom studied in parasites and other host-symbiont systems. Here, we studied mtDNA variation in a host-symbiont non-model system: 418 individual feather mites from 17 feather mite species living on 17 different passerine bird species. We explored how a surrogate of census size, the median infrapopulation size (i.e., the median number of individual parasites per infected host individual), explains mtDNA genetic diversity. Feather mite species genetic diversity was positively correlated with mean infrapopulation size, explaining 34% of the variation. As expected from the biology of feather mites, we found bottleneck signatures for most of the species studied but, in particular, three species presented extremely low mtDNA diversity values given their infrapopulation size. Their star-like haplotype networks (in contrast with more reticulated networks for the other species) suggested that their low genetic diversity was the consequence of severe bottlenecks or selective sweeps. Our study shows for the first time that mtDNA diversity can be explained by infrapopulation sizes, and suggests that departures from this relationship could be informative of underlying ecological and evolutionary processes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 3%
Spain 1 3%
Unknown 33 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 26%
Student > Master 8 23%
Researcher 6 17%
Professor 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 51%
Environmental Science 6 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Unknown 6 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 02 February 2016.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Ecology and Evolution
#6,058
of 8,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,812
of 392,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology and Evolution
#69
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,476 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 392,988 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.