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 |
Editing of the urease gene by CRISPR-Cas in the diatom Thalassiosira pseudonana
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Plant Methods, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13007-016-0148-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amanda Hopes, Vladimir Nekrasov, Sophien Kamoun, Thomas Mock |
| Abstract |
CRISPR-Cas is a recent and powerful addition to the molecular toolbox which allows programmable genome editing. It has been used to modify genes in a wide variety of organisms, but only two alga to date. Here we present a methodology to edit the genome of Thalassiosira pseudonana, a model centric diatom with both ecological significance and high biotechnological potential, using CRISPR-Cas. A single construct was assembled using Golden Gate cloning. Two sgRNAs were used to introduce a precise 37 nt deletion early in the coding region of the urease gene. A high percentage of bi-allelic mutations (≤61.5%) were observed in clones with the CRISPR-Cas construct. Growth of bi-allelic mutants in urea led to a significant reduction in growth rate and cell size compared to growth in nitrate. CRISPR-Cas can precisely and efficiently edit the genome of T. pseudonana. The use of Golden Gate cloning to assemble CRISPR-Cas constructs gives additional flexibility to the CRISPR-Cas method and facilitates modifications to target alternative genes or species. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 | 5 | 42% |
| United States | 3 | 25% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| Belgium | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 6 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 6 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 217 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 214 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 42 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 31 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 26 | 12% |
| Unknown | 51 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 71 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 62 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 3% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 2% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 7% |
| Unknown | 54 | 25% |
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 21 June 2021.
All research outputs
#3,987,324
of 24,378,986 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#218
of 1,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,103
of 423,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,378,986 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 1,176 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 423,731 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.