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 |
Mouse strain specific gene expression differences for illumina microarray expression profiling in embryos
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-0500-5-232 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Petra Kraus, Xing Xing, Siew Lan Lim, Max E Fun, V Sivakamasundari, Sook Peng Yap, Haixia Lee, R Krishna Murthy Karuturi, Thomas Lufkin |
| Abstract |
In the field of mouse genetics the advent of technologies like microarray based expression profiling dramatically increased data availability and sensitivity, yet these advanced methods are often vulnerable to the unavoidable heterogeneity of in vivo material and might therefore reflect differentially expressed genes between mouse strains of no relevance to a targeted experiment. The aim of this study was not to elaborate on the usefulness of microarray analysis in general, but to expand our knowledge regarding this potential "background noise" for the widely used Illumina microarray platform surpassing existing data which focused primarily on the adult sensory and nervous system, by analyzing patterns of gene expression at different embryonic stages using wild type strains and modern transgenic models of often non-isogenic backgrounds. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
| Canada | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 87% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 27% |
| Researcher | 3 | 20% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 47% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 27% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 April 2013.
All research outputs
#18,337,420
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#3,010
of 4,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,330
of 163,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#47
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,256 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 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 163,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.