↓ Skip to main content

Application of circular consensus sequencing and network analysis to characterize the bovine IgG repertoire

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Immunology, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 585)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Application of circular consensus sequencing and network analysis to characterize the bovine IgG repertoire
Published in
BMC Immunology, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2172-13-52
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter A Larsen, Timothy P L Smith

Abstract

Vertebrate immune systems generate diverse repertoires of antibodies capable of mediating response to a variety of antigens. Next generation sequencing methods provide unique approaches to a number of immuno-based research areas including antibody discovery and engineering, disease surveillance, and host immune response to vaccines. In particular, single-molecule circular consensus sequencing permits the sequencing of antibody repertoires at previously unattainable depths of coverage and accuracy. We approached the bovine immunoglobulin G (IgG) repertoire with the objective of characterizing diversity of expressed IgG transcripts. Here we present single-molecule real-time sequencing data of expressed IgG heavy-chain repertoires of four individual cattle. We describe the diversity observed within antigen binding regions and visualize this diversity using a network-based approach.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
China 1 1%
Unknown 76 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 34%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 22%
Student > Master 7 8%
Other 5 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 6%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 9 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 4%
Chemistry 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 10 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 05 June 2014.
All research outputs
#2,804,944
of 22,756,196 outputs
Outputs from BMC Immunology
#31
of 585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,684
of 168,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Immunology
#1
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,756,196 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 585 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 168,747 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 91% of its contemporaries.