↓ Skip to main content

Toward understanding the genetic basis of adaptation to high-elevation life in poikilothermic species: A comparative transcriptomic analysis of two ranid frogs, Rana chensinensis and R. kukunoris

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, November 2012
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 (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
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
Toward understanding the genetic basis of adaptation to high-elevation life in poikilothermic species: A comparative transcriptomic analysis of two ranid frogs, Rana chensinensis and R. kukunoris
Published in
BMC Genomics, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-13-588
Pubmed ID
Authors

Weizhao Yang, Yin Qi, Ke Bi, Jinzhong Fu

Abstract

Understanding how organisms adapt to high-elevation environments at a genome scale provides novel insights into the process of adaptive evolution. Previous studies have mainly focused on endothermic organisms, while poikilothermic species may have evolved different mechanisms to cope with high-elevation environments. In this context, we sequenced transcriptomes of a pair of closely related anuran species, Rana chensinensis and R. kukunoris, which inhabit respective low- and high-elevation habitats. By comparing the two transcriptomes, we identified candidate genes that may be involved in high-elevation adaption in poikilothermic species.

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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 99 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 25%
Researcher 19 18%
Student > Master 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 9%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 11 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 68 64%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 18%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Psychology 1 <1%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 12 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 02 June 2015.
All research outputs
#3,647,135
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#1,437
of 10,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,386
of 184,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#18
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,616 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. 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 184,149 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.