↓ Skip to main content

Blocking primers to enhance PCR amplification of rare sequences in mixed samples – a case study on prey DNA in Antarctic krill stomachs

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Zoology, January 2008
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 (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
patent
2 patents
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
254 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
754 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
Blocking primers to enhance PCR amplification of rare sequences in mixed samples – a case study on prey DNA in Antarctic krill stomachs
Published in
Frontiers in Zoology, January 2008
DOI 10.1186/1742-9994-5-12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hege Vestheim, Simon N Jarman

Abstract

Identification of DNA sequence diversity is a powerful means for assessing the species present in environmental samples. The most common molecular strategies for estimating taxonomic composition depend upon PCR with universal primers that amplify an orthologous DNA region from a range of species. The diversity of sequences within a sample that can be detected by universal primers is often compromised by high concentrations of some DNA templates. If the DNA within the sample contains a small number of sequences in relatively high concentrations, then less concentrated sequences are often not amplified because the PCR favours the dominant DNA types. This is a particular problem in molecular diet studies, where predator DNA is often present in great excess of food-derived DNA.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 754 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 13 2%
Germany 7 <1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Chile 3 <1%
Poland 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Finland 2 <1%
Sweden 2 <1%
Other 12 2%
Unknown 705 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 183 24%
Researcher 178 24%
Student > Master 102 14%
Student > Bachelor 63 8%
Other 40 5%
Other 115 15%
Unknown 73 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 404 54%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 104 14%
Environmental Science 78 10%
Chemistry 11 1%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 1%
Other 50 7%
Unknown 96 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 19 May 2021.
All research outputs
#2,410,193
of 17,977,824 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Zoology
#164
of 578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,012
of 106,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Zoology
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,977,824 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 106,021 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them