↓ Skip to main content

Further support for the alignment of cattle along magnetic field lines: reply to Hert et al.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Comparative Physiology A, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% 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 (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
13 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Further support for the alignment of cattle along magnetic field lines: reply to Hert et al.
Published in
Journal of Comparative Physiology A, October 2011
DOI 10.1007/s00359-011-0674-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. Begall, H. Burda, J. Červený, O. Gerter, J. Neef-Weisse, P. Němec

Abstract

Hert et al. (J Comp Physiol A, 2011) challenged one part of the study by Begall et al. (PNAS 105:13451-13455, 2008) claiming that they could not replicate the finding of preferential magnetic alignment of cattle recorded in aerial images of Google Earth. However, Hert and co-authors used a different statistical approach and applied the statistics on a sample partly unsuitable to examine magnetic alignment. About 50% of their data represent noise (resolution of the images is too poor to enable unambiguous measurement of the direction of body axes, pastures are on slopes, near settlements or high voltage power-lines, etc.). Moreover, the authors have selected for their analysis only ~ 40% of cattle that were present on the pastures analyzed. Here, we reanalyze all usable data and show that cattle significantly align their body axes in North-South direction on pastures analyzed by Hert and co-authors. This finding thus supports our previous study. In addition, we show by using aerial Google Earth images with good resolution, that the magnetic alignment is more pronounced in resting than in standing cattle.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Sweden 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Austria 1 2%
Unknown 46 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Student > Bachelor 10 20%
Researcher 9 18%
Student > Master 3 6%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 14 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 46%
Environmental Science 3 6%
Physics and Astronomy 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 12 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 18 March 2016.
All research outputs
#1,315,230
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#70
of 1,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,038
of 142,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,450 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. 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 142,200 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 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them