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 |
SymbioGBR: a web-based database of Symbiodinium associated with cnidarian hosts on the Great Barrier Reef
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ecology and Evolution, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6785-13-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda Tonk, Pim Bongaerts, Eugenia M Sampayo, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg |
| Abstract |
The algal endosymbionts (genus Symbiodinium) associated with scleractinian corals (and other reef invertebrates) have received a lot of research attention in the past decade, particularly as certain host-symbiont associations appear more affected by increasing seawater temperatures than others. With the rapid accumulation of information on the diversity of Symbiodinium, it is becoming increasingly difficult to compare newly acquired Symbiodinium data with existing data to detect patterns of host-symbiont specificity on broader spatial scales. The lack of a general consensus on the classification of Symbiodinium species coupled with the variety of different markers used to identify the genus Symbiodinium (ITS1, ITS2, LSU D1/D2, chloroplast 23S rDNA and psbA minicircle) further complicate direct comparison. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 82 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 23% |
| Researcher | 16 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 18 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 45 | 52% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 13% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 17 | 20% |
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 31 March 2014.
All research outputs
#4,260,716
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1,091
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,355
of 208,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#17
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 208,876 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.