↓ Skip to main content

Male rutting calls synchronize reproduction in Serengeti wildebeest

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, July 2018
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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Male rutting calls synchronize reproduction in Serengeti wildebeest
Published in
Scientific Reports, July 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41598-018-28307-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Justin M. Calabrese, Allison Moss Clay, Richard D. Estes, Katerina V. Thompson, Steven L. Monfort

Abstract

Tightly synchronized reproduction in vast wildebeest herds underpins the keystone role this iconic species plays in the Serengeti. However, despite decades of study, the proximate synchronizing mechanism remains unknown. Combining a season-long field experiment with simple stochastic process models, we show that females exposed to playback of male rutting vocalizations are over three times more synchronous in their expected time to mating than a control group isolated from all male stimuli. Additionally, predictions of both mating and calving synchrony based on the playback group were highly consistent with independent data on wildebeest mating and calving synchrony, while control-based predictions were inconsistent with the data. Taken together, our results provide the first experimental evidence that male rutting vocalizations alone could account for the highly synchronized reproduction observed in Serengeti wildebeest. Given anthropogenically driven losses in many areas, a mechanistic understanding of synchrony can highlight additional risks declining wildebeest populations may face.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Master 4 15%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 6 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 26%
Environmental Science 6 22%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 November 2018.
All research outputs
#1,839,682
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#16,811
of 124,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,604
of 327,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#487
of 3,522 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 124,827 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 327,553 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,522 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.