↓ Skip to main content

Dietary behaviour of man-eating lions as revealed by dental microwear textures

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, April 2017
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 (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
59 news outlets
blogs
13 blogs
twitter
34 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Dietary behaviour of man-eating lions as revealed by dental microwear textures
Published in
Scientific Reports, April 2017
DOI 10.1038/s41598-017-00948-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Larisa R. G. DeSantis, Bruce D. Patterson

Abstract

Lions (Panthera leo) feed on diverse prey species, a range that is broadened by their cooperative hunting. Although humans are not typical prey, habitual man-eating by lions is well documented. Fathoming the motivations of the Tsavo and Mfuwe man-eaters (killed in 1898 in Kenya and 1991 in Zambia, respectively) may be elusive, but we can clarify aspects of their behaviour using dental microwear texture analysis. Specifically, we analysed the surface textures of lion teeth to assess whether these notorious man-eating lions scavenged carcasses during their depredations. Compared to wild-caught lions elsewhere in Africa and other large feliforms, including cheetahs and hyenas, dental microwear textures of the man-eaters do not suggest extreme durophagy (e.g. bone processing) shortly before death. Dental injuries to two of the three man-eaters examined may have induced shifts in feeding onto softer foods. Further, prompt carcass reclamation by humans likely limited the man-eaters' access to bones. Man-eating was likely a viable alternative to hunting and/or scavenging ungulates due to dental disease and/or limited prey availability.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Chile 1 3%
Unknown 34 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Student > Master 7 19%
Other 2 6%
Professor 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 39%
Environmental Science 6 17%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 6 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 580. 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 01 April 2021.
All research outputs
#24,986
of 19,622,294 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#401
of 105,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#678
of 279,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#17
of 2,316 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,622,294 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 105,129 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 279,579 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 2,316 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 99% of its contemporaries.