↓ Skip to main content

Genome sequences and annotation of two urinary isolates of E. coli

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Microbiome, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Genome sequences and annotation of two urinary isolates of E. coli
Published in
Environmental Microbiome, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40793-016-0202-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Travis K. Price, Arya Mehrtash, Laurynas Kalesinskas, Kema Malki, Evann E. Hilt, Catherine Putonti, Alan J. Wolfe

Abstract

The genus Escherichia includes pathogens and commensals. Bladder infections (cystitis) result most often from colonization of the bladder by uropathogenic E. coli strains. In contrast, a poorly defined condition called asymptomatic bacteriuria results from colonization of the bladder with E. coli strains without symptoms. As part of an on-going attempt to identify and characterize the newly discovered female urinary microbiota, we report the genome sequences and annotation of two urinary isolates of E. coli: one (E78) was isolated from a female patient who self-reported cystitis; the other (E75) was isolated from a female patient who reported that she did not have symptoms of cystitis. Whereas strain E75 is most closely related to an avian extraintestinal pathogen, strain E78 is a member of a clade that includes extraintestinal strains often found in the human bladder. Both genomes are uncommonly rich in prophages.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 29%
Student > Master 4 17%
Other 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 25%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 17%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Mathematics 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 3 13%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 October 2016.
All research outputs
#15,982,037
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Microbiome
#455
of 786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,131
of 326,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Microbiome
#10
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 786 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 326,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.