↓ Skip to main content

Automated eukaryotic gene structure annotation using EVidenceModeler and the Program to Assemble Spliced Alignments

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology, January 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
2478 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
824 Mendeley
citeulike
11 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Automated eukaryotic gene structure annotation using EVidenceModeler and the Program to Assemble Spliced Alignments
Published in
Genome Biology, January 2008
DOI 10.1186/gb-2008-9-1-r7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian J Haas, Steven L Salzberg, Wei Zhu, Mihaela Pertea, Jonathan E Allen, Joshua Orvis, Owen White, C Robin Buell, Jennifer R Wortman

Abstract

EVidenceModeler (EVM) is presented as an automated eukaryotic gene structure annotation tool that reports eukaryotic gene structures as a weighted consensus of all available evidence. EVM, when combined with the Program to Assemble Spliced Alignments (PASA), yields a comprehensive, configurable annotation system that predicts protein-coding genes and alternatively spliced isoforms. Our experiments on both rice and human genome sequences demonstrate that EVM produces automated gene structure annotation approaching the quality of manual curation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 824 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 11 1%
Germany 3 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Argentina 3 <1%
Sweden 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Other 14 2%
Unknown 778 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 163 20%
Researcher 159 19%
Student > Master 95 12%
Student > Bachelor 53 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 45 5%
Other 133 16%
Unknown 176 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 369 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 163 20%
Computer Science 17 2%
Unspecified 14 2%
Environmental Science 13 2%
Other 42 5%
Unknown 206 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 10 February 2021.
All research outputs
#7,960,052
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#3,393
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,050
of 168,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#18
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 168,512 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.