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 |
Evaluating the impacts of stressors of Pseudomonas syringae pathovar tomato on the effectiveness of multi-locus variable number tandem repeat analysis and multi-locus sequence typing in microbial forensic investigations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Investigative Genetics, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2041-2223-5-10 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mindy James, Ulrich Melcher, Jacqueline Fletcher |
| Abstract |
Crops in the USA are vulnerable to natural and criminal threats because of their widespread cultivation and lack of surveillance, and because of implementation of growing practices such as monoculture. To prepare for investigation and attribution of such events, forensic assays, including determination of molecular profiles, are being adapted for use with plant pathogens. The use of multi-locus variable number tandem repeat (VNTR) analysis (MLVA) and multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) in investigations involving plant pathogens may be problematic because the long lag periods between pathogen introduction and discovery of associated disease may provide enough time for evolution to occur in the regions of the genome employed in each assay. Thus, more information on the stability of the loci employed in these methods is needed. |
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 Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 8 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 25% |
| Researcher | 1 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 38% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
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 12 August 2014.
All research outputs
#18,376,056
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Investigative Genetics
#88
of 97 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,271
of 230,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Investigative Genetics
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 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 97 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 230,235 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.