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 |
An automated graphics tool for comparative genomics: the Coulson plot generator
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-14-141 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Helen I Field, Richard MR Coulson, Mark C Field |
| Abstract |
Comparative analysis is an essential component to biology. When applied to genomics for example, analysis may require comparisons between the predicted presence and absence of genes in a group of genomes under consideration. Frequently, genes can be grouped into small categories based on functional criteria, for example membership of a multimeric complex, participation in a metabolic or signaling pathway or shared sequence features and/or paralogy. These patterns of retention and loss are highly informative for the prediction of function, and hence possible biological context, and can provide great insights into the evolutionary history of cellular functions. However, representation of such information in a standard spreadsheet is a poor visual means from which to extract patterns within a dataset. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 | 4 | 40% |
| United States | 3 | 30% |
| Norway | 1 | 10% |
| Germany | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 1 | 10% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 8 | 80% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 2 | 3% |
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Sweden | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Greece | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 65 | 84% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 25 | 32% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Professor | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 3 | 4% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 44 | 57% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 14% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 6% |
| Engineering | 4 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 6% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 18 June 2013.
All research outputs
#5,859,794
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#2,167
of 7,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,374
of 193,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#38
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,256 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 193,472 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 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 69% of its contemporaries.