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 |
Limitations of a metabolic network-based reverse ecology method for inferring host–pathogen interactions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12859-017-1696-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kazuhiro Takemoto, Kazuki Aie |
| Abstract |
Host-pathogen interactions are important in a wide range of research fields. Given the importance of metabolic crosstalk between hosts and pathogens, a metabolic network-based reverse ecology method was proposed to infer these interactions. However, the validity of this method remains unclear because of the various explanations presented and the influence of potentially confounding factors that have thus far been neglected. We re-evaluated the importance of the reverse ecology method for evaluating host-pathogen interactions while statistically controlling for confounding effects using oxygen requirement, genome, metabolic network, and phylogeny data. Our data analyses showed that host-pathogen interactions were more strongly influenced by genome size, primary network parameters (e.g., number of edges), oxygen requirement, and phylogeny than the reserve ecology-based measures. These results indicate the limitations of the reverse ecology method; however, they do not discount the importance of adopting reverse ecology approaches altogether. Rather, we highlight the need for developing more suitable methods for inferring host-pathogen interactions and conducting more careful examinations of the relationships between metabolic networks and host-pathogen interactions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 21% |
| Unknown | 3 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 41% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 17% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 14% |
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 26 May 2017.
All research outputs
#13,766,415
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,303
of 7,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,284
of 314,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#54
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,387 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 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 314,580 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.