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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Protocol: Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) methodology to investigate histone modifications in two model diatom species
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Plant Methods, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-4811-8-48 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xin Lin, Leïla Tirichine, Chris Bowler |
| Abstract |
In this report we describe a chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) protocol for two fully sequenced model diatom species Phaeodactylum tricornutum and Thalassiosira pseudonana. This protocol allows the extraction of satisfactory amounts of chromatin and gives reproducible results. We coupled the ChIP assay with real time quantitative PCR. Our results reveal that the two major histone marks H3K4me2 and H3K9me2 exist in P. tricornutum and T. pseudonana. As in other eukaryotes, H3K4me2 marks active genes whereas H3K9me2 marks transcriptionally inactive transposable elements. Unexpectedly however, T. pseudonana housekeeping genes also show a relative enrichment of H3K9me2. We also discuss optimization of the procedure, including growth conditions, cross linking and sonication. Validation of the protocol provides a set of genes and transposable elements that can be used as controls for studies using ChIP in each diatom species. This protocol can be easily adapted to other diatoms and eukaryotic phytoplankton species for genetic and biochemical studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Philippines | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 152 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 47 | 30% |
| Researcher | 38 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Unknown | 25 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 76 | 48% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 37 | 23% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 2% |
| Engineering | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 5% |
| Unknown | 28 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 December 2012.
All research outputs
#14,158,070
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#705
of 1,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,798
of 277,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#13
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,073 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 277,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.