↓ Skip to main content

ALLPATHS 2: small genomes assembled accurately and with high continuity from short paired reads

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology, October 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
149 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
345 Mendeley
citeulike
27 CiteULike
connotea
8 Connotea
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
ALLPATHS 2: small genomes assembled accurately and with high continuity from short paired reads
Published in
Genome Biology, October 2009
DOI 10.1186/gb-2009-10-10-r103
Pubmed ID
Authors

Iain MacCallum, Dariusz Przybylski, Sante Gnerre, Joshua Burton, Ilya Shlyakhter, Andreas Gnirke, Joel Malek, Kevin McKernan, Swati Ranade, Terrance P Shea, Louise Williams, Sarah Young, Chad Nusbaum, David B Jaffe

Abstract

We demonstrate that genome sequences approaching finished quality can be generated from short paired reads. Using 36 base (fragment) and 26 base (jumping) reads from five microbial genomes of varied GC composition and sizes up to 40 Mb, ALLPATHS2 generated assemblies with long, accurate contigs and scaffolds. Velvet and EULER-SR were less accurate. For example, for Escherichia coli, the fraction of 10-kb stretches that were perfect was 99.8% (ALLPATHS2), 68.7% (Velvet), and 42.1% (EULER-SR).

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 345 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 16 5%
Germany 9 3%
United Kingdom 7 2%
Brazil 6 2%
Netherlands 4 1%
Norway 4 1%
Italy 3 <1%
France 3 <1%
Japan 3 <1%
Other 19 6%
Unknown 271 79%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 103 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 77 22%
Student > Master 38 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 25 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 6%
Other 63 18%
Unknown 17 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 210 61%
Computer Science 44 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 35 10%
Engineering 7 2%
Chemistry 5 1%
Other 20 6%
Unknown 24 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 30 July 2019.
All research outputs
#7,355,485
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#3,306
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,873
of 106,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#22
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 106,406 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.