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 |
Assessment of replicate bias in 454 pyrosequencing and a multi-purpose read-filtering tool
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, May 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-0500-4-149 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jérôme Mariette, Céline Noirot, Christophe Klopp |
| Abstract |
Roche 454 pyrosequencing platform is often considered the most versatile of the Next Generation Sequencing technology platforms, permitting the sequencing of large genomes, the analysis of variations or the study of transcriptomes. A recent reported bias leads to the production of multiple reads for a unique DNA fragment in a random manner within a run. This bias has a direct impact on the quality of the measurement of the representation of the fragments using the reads. Other cleaning steps are usually performed on the reads before assembly or alignment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Norway | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 50 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 35% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 5 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 36 | 65% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 7% |
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 27 February 2014.
All research outputs
#18,365,132
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#3,013
of 4,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,986
of 112,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#29
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,261 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 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 112,222 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.