↓ Skip to main content

MEvoLib v1.0: the first molecular evolution library for Python

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
MEvoLib v1.0: the first molecular evolution library for Python
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-1303-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jorge Álvarez-Jarreta, Eduardo Ruiz-Pesini

Abstract

Molecular evolution studies involve many different hard computational problems solved, in most cases, with heuristic algorithms that provide a nearly optimal solution. Hence, diverse software tools exist for the different stages involved in a molecular evolution workflow. We present MEvoLib, the first molecular evolution library for Python, providing a framework to work with different tools and methods involved in the common tasks of molecular evolution workflows. In contrast with already existing bioinformatics libraries, MEvoLib is focused on the stages involved in molecular evolution studies, enclosing the set of tools with a common purpose in a single high-level interface with fast access to their frequent parameterizations. The gene clustering from partial or complete sequences has been improved with a new method that integrates accessible external information (e.g. GenBank's features data). Moreover, MEvoLib adjusts the fetching process from NCBI databases to optimize the download bandwidth usage. In addition, it has been implemented using parallelization techniques to cope with even large-case scenarios. MEvoLib is the first library for Python designed to facilitate molecular evolution researches both for expert and novel users. Its unique interface for each common task comprises several tools with their most used parameterizations. It has also included a method to take advantage of biological knowledge to improve the gene partition of sequence datasets. Additionally, its implementation incorporates parallelization techniques to enhance computational costs when handling very large input datasets.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 4 22%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 5 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 17%
Engineering 3 17%
Unknown 2 11%
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 31 October 2016.
All research outputs
#14,638,545
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,576
of 7,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,872
of 316,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#57
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 316,378 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 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 50% of its contemporaries.