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 |
Filtering "genic" open reading frames from genomic DNA samples for advanced annotation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Genomics, June 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2164-12-s1-s5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sara D'Angelo, Nileena Velappan, Flavio Mignone, Claudio Santoro, Daniele Sblattero, Csaba Kiss, Andrew RM Bradbury |
| Abstract |
In order to carry out experimental gene annotation, DNA encoding open reading frames (ORFs) derived from real genes (termed "genic") in the correct frame is required. When genes are correctly assigned, isolation of genic DNA for functional annotation can be carried out by PCR. However, not all genes are correctly assigned, and even when correctly assigned, gene products are often incorrectly folded when expressed in heterologous hosts. This is a problem that can sometimes be overcome by the expression of protein fragments encoding domains, rather than full-length proteins. One possible method to isolate DNA encoding such domains would to "filter" complex DNA (cDNA libraries, genomic and metagenomic DNA) for gene fragments that confer a selectable phenotype relying on correct folding, with all such domains present in a complex DNA sample, termed the "domainome". |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Italy | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 24% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 43% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 14% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 19% |
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 11 August 2011.
All research outputs
#18,293,967
of 22,649,029 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#8,136
of 10,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,033
of 113,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#60
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,649,029 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 10,605 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 113,556 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 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.