↓ Skip to main content

mtDNA haplogroup and single nucleotide polymorphisms structure human microbiome communities

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
78 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
177 Mendeley
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
mtDNA haplogroup and single nucleotide polymorphisms structure human microbiome communities
Published in
BMC Genomics, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-15-257
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun Ma, Cristian Coarfa, Xiang Qin, Penelope E Bonnen, Aleksandar Milosavljevic, James Versalovic, Kjersti Aagaard

Abstract

Although our microbial community and genomes (the human microbiome) outnumber our genome by several orders of magnitude, to what extent the human host genetic complement informs the microbiota composition is not clear. The Human Microbiome Project (HMP) Consortium established a unique population-scale framework with which to characterize the relationship of microbial community structure with their human hosts. A wide variety of taxa and metabolic pathways have been shown to be differentially distributed by virtue of race/ethnicity in the HMP. Given that mtDNA haplogroups are the maternally derived ancestral genomic markers and mitochondria's role as the generator for cellular ATP, characterizing the relationship between human mtDNA genomic variants and microbiome profiles becomes of potential marked biologic and clinical interest.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 170 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 23%
Researcher 26 15%
Student > Master 20 11%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 28 16%
Unknown 35 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 57 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 2%
Other 16 9%
Unknown 45 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 17 October 2015.
All research outputs
#2,821,662
of 24,368,983 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#874
of 10,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,924
of 230,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#9
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,368,983 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,964 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 230,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.