↓ Skip to main content

Phylogenetic Classification of Seed Plants of Taiwan

Overview of attention for article published in Botanical Studies, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#44 of 100)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Phylogenetic Classification of Seed Plants of Taiwan
Published in
Botanical Studies, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40529-017-0206-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cheng-Tao Lin, Kuo-Fang Chung

Abstract

Biological classification, the hierarchical arrangement of scientific names of organisms, constitutes the core infrastructure of biological databases. For an efficient management of biological databases, adopting a stable and universal biological classification system is crucial. Currently in Taiwan Biodiversity Information Facility (TaiBIF; http://taibif.tw/ ), the national portal website that integrates Taiwan's biodiversity information databases, angiosperms are arranged according to Cronquist's System of Classification, which is not compatible with current trend of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (APG) classification. To consolidate the function and management of the database, TaiBIF is moving to adopt the APG IV classification and Christenhusz et al. (Phytotaxa 19:55-70, 2011)'s classification of gymnosperms, which we summarize as the Phylogenetic Classification of Seed Plants of Taiwan. The Phylogenetic Classification of Seed Plants of Taiwan places gymnosperms in five families [vs. eight families in the Flora of Taiwan (FOT)] and angiosperms in 210 families (vs. 193 families in FOT). Three FOT gymnosperm families are synonymized in current treatment. Of the 210 APG IV families, familial circumscriptions of 114 families are identical with FOT and 50 families are recircumscription of FOT, with 46 families newly added. Of the 29 FOT families not included in current classification, two families are excluded and 27 families are synonymized. The adoption of the Phylogenetic Classification of Seed Plants of Taiwan in TaiBIF will provide better service and efficient management of the nation's biodiversity information databases.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 29%
Student > Master 3 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 59%
Computer Science 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Unknown 5 29%

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 21 November 2017.
All research outputs
#9,346,613
of 12,172,179 outputs
Outputs from Botanical Studies
#44
of 100 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,157
of 336,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Botanical Studies
#7
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,172,179 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 100 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 336,347 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.