↓ Skip to main content

Modular, rule-based modeling for the design of eukaryotic synthetic gene circuits.

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Systems Biology, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
citeulike
4 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
Modular, rule-based modeling for the design of eukaryotic synthetic gene circuits.
Published in
BMC Systems Biology, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1752-0509-7-42
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marchisio MA, Colaiacovo M, Whitehead E, Stelling J

Abstract

The modular design of synthetic gene circuits via composable parts (DNA segments) and pools of signal carriers (molecules such as RNA polymerases and ribosomes) has been successfully applied to bacterial systems. However, eukaryotic cells are becoming a preferential host for new synthetic biology applications. Therefore, an accurate description of the intricate network of reactions that take place inside eukaryotic parts and pools is necessary. Rule-based modeling approaches are increasingly used to obtain compact representations of reaction networks in biological systems. However, this approach is intrinsically non-modular and not suitable per se for the description of composable genetic modules. In contrast, the Model Description Language (MDL) adopted by the modeling tool ProMoT is highly modular and it enables a faithful representation of biological parts and pools.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 3%
China 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 63 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 24%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Other 4 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 6%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 17%
Computer Science 9 13%
Engineering 5 7%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 11 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 28 September 2014.
All research outputs
#1,789,275
of 11,126,160 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#114
of 964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,175
of 131,926 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#5
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,126,160 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 964 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 131,926 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.