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 |
New approach for fish breeding by chemical mutagenesis: establishment of TILLING method in fugu (Takifugu rubripes) with ENU mutagenesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Genomics, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2164-14-786 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Miwa Kuroyanagi, Takashi Katayama, Tadashi Imai, Yoshihisa Yamamoto, Shin-ichi Chisada, Yasutoshi Yoshiura, Tomokazu Ushijima, Tomonao Matsushita, Masashi Fujita, Aoi Nozawa, Yuzuru Suzuki, Kiyoshi Kikuchi, Hiroyuki Okamoto |
| Abstract |
In fish breeding, it is essential to discover and generate fish exhibiting an effective phenotype for the aquaculture industry, but screening for natural mutants by only depending on natural spontaneous mutations is limited. Presently, reverse genetics has become an important tool to generate mutants, which exhibit the phenotype caused by inactivation of a gene. TILLING (Targeting Induced Local Lesions IN Genomes) is a reverse genetics strategy that combines random chemical mutagenesis with high-throughput discovery technologies for screening the induced mutations in target genes. Although the chemical mutagenesis has been used widely in a variety of model species and also genetic breeding of microorganisms and crops, the application of the mutagenesis in fish breeding has been only rarely reported. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 39 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 9 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 November 2013.
All research outputs
#15,557,505
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#6,304
of 10,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,510
of 215,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#69
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,793 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 215,365 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 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 50% of its contemporaries.