↓ Skip to main content

Histoplasma yeast and mycelial transcriptomes reveal pathogenic-phase and lineage-specific gene expression profiles

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Histoplasma yeast and mycelial transcriptomes reveal pathogenic-phase and lineage-specific gene expression profiles
Published in
BMC Genomics, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-14-695
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica A Edwards, Chenxi Chen, Megan M Kemski, Jinnan Hu, Thomas K Mitchell, Chad A Rappleye

Abstract

The dimorphic fungus Histoplasma capsulatum causes respiratory and systemic disease in mammalian hosts by expression of factors that enable survival within phagocytic cells of the immune system. Histoplasma's dimorphism is distinguished by growth either as avirulent mycelia or as pathogenic yeast. Geographically distinct strains of Histoplasma differ in their relative virulence in mammalian hosts and in production of and requirement for specific virulence factors. The close similarity in the genome sequences of these diverse strains suggests that phenotypic variations result from differences in gene expression rather than gene content. To provide insight into how the transcriptional program translates into morphological variation and the pathogenic lifestyle, we compared the transcriptional profile of the pathogenic yeast phase and the non-pathogenic mycelial phase of two clinical isolates of Histoplasma.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 26%
Student > Master 9 14%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 13 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 October 2013.
All research outputs
#17,699,064
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#7,539
of 10,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,953
of 209,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#80
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,628 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 209,635 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.