↓ Skip to main content

Length–weight relationship and condition factor of giant tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon (Fabricius, 1798) from four breeding families

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Length–weight relationship and condition factor of giant tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon (Fabricius, 1798) from four breeding families
Published in
SpringerPlus, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-2979-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yundong Li, Falin Zhou, Zhenhua Ma, Jianhua Huang, Shigui Jiang, Qibin Yang, Tao Li, Jian G. Qin

Abstract

Length-weight relationships and condition factors of giant tiger shrimp Penaeus monodon (Fabricius, 1798) from four breeding families (family S: South China seas family, family A: African family, family SA: ♂ South China seas family × ♀ Africa family, family AS: ♂ Africa family × ♀ South China seas family) were evaluated in this study. Length-weight relationships can be expressed as W = 0.0239BL(2.789) (R (2) = 0.8977) in family S, W = 0.0206BL(2.9107) (R (2) = 0.9107) in family A, W = 0.0211BL(2.831) (R (2) = 0.8869) in family SA, and W = 0.0249BL(2.781) (R (2) = 0.9159) in family AS. The growth of P. monodon from four breeding families follows a negative allometric trend. Fulton's body condition factor (K) was not significantly different in males, while in females, the highest K (3.07) was observed in family AS, and the lowest K was found in family A (1.88). Results from the present study indicate that the cross group family AS (♂ Africa family × ♀ South China seas family) has obvious heterosis in females. This may suggest that the direction of further breeding of P. monodon, should be conducted by using Africa family as male parent, and South China seas family as female parent. Results from the present study will provide valuable information on selective breeding in P. monodon. Methodology used in the present study can also be applied in other similar species.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 14 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 39%
Environmental Science 8 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 16 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 October 2016.
All research outputs
#18,475,157
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,261
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281,540
of 364,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#171
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 364,263 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.