↓ Skip to main content

Separating homeologs by phasing in the tetraploid wheat transcriptome

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology (Online Edition), June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
35 tweeters
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
119 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
243 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
Separating homeologs by phasing in the tetraploid wheat transcriptome
Published in
Genome Biology (Online Edition), June 2013
DOI 10.1186/gb-2013-14-6-r66
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ksenia V Krasileva, Vince Buffalo, Paul Bailey, Stephen Pearce, Sarah Ayling, Facundo Tabbita, Marcelo Soria, Shichen Wang, Eduard Akhunov, Cristobal Uauy, Jorge Dubcovsky

Abstract

The high level of identity among duplicated homoeologous genomes in tetraploid pasta wheat presents substantial challenges for de novo transcriptome assembly. To solve this problem, we develop a specialized bioinformatics workflow that optimizes transcriptome assembly and separation of merged homoeologs. To evaluate our strategy, we sequence and assemble the transcriptome of one of the diploid ancestors of pasta wheat, and compare both assemblies with a benchmark set of 13,472 full-length, non-redundant bread wheat cDNAs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 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 243 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 6 2%
United States 3 1%
Italy 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Argentina 2 <1%
Sweden 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Other 5 2%
Unknown 218 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 65 27%
Researcher 56 23%
Student > Master 21 9%
Student > Bachelor 16 7%
Other 15 6%
Other 49 20%
Unknown 21 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 171 70%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 31 13%
Computer Science 11 5%
Engineering 3 1%
Materials Science 2 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 23 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 02 August 2019.
All research outputs
#1,043,336
of 21,347,367 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#910
of 4,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,088
of 174,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#6
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,347,367 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 174,525 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.