↓ Skip to main content

Risky Ripples Allow Bats and Frogs to Eavesdrop on a Multisensory Sexual Display

Overview of attention for article published in Science, January 2014
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
22 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
37 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
2 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 Mendeley
Title
Risky Ripples Allow Bats and Frogs to Eavesdrop on a Multisensory Sexual Display
Published in
Science, January 2014
DOI 10.1126/science.1244812
Pubmed ID
Authors

W. Halfwerk, P. L. Jones, R. C. Taylor, M. J. Ryan, R. A. Page

Abstract

Animal displays are often perceived by intended and unintended receivers in more than one sensory system. In addition, cues that are an incidental consequence of signal production can also be perceived by different receivers, even when the receivers use different sensory systems to perceive them. Here we show that the vocal responses of male túngara frogs (Physalaemus pustulosus) increase twofold when call-induced water ripples are added to the acoustic component of a rival's call. Hunting bats (Trachops cirrhosus) can echolocate this signal by-product and prefer to attack model frogs when ripples are added to the acoustic component of the call. This study illustrates how the perception of a signal by-product by intended and unintended receivers through different sensory systems generates both costs and benefits for the signaler.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 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 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
Netherlands 2 1%
Brazil 2 1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 145 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 24%
Student > Bachelor 30 19%
Student > Master 25 16%
Researcher 21 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 32 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 112 72%
Unspecified 13 8%
Environmental Science 9 6%
Neuroscience 6 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 11 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 242. 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 06 February 2019.
All research outputs
#47,600
of 12,902,491 outputs
Outputs from Science
#2,165
of 60,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#831
of 240,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#36
of 809 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,902,491 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 60,549 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 42.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 240,476 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 809 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 95% of its contemporaries.