↓ Skip to main content

Global analysis of saliva as a source of bacterial genes for insights into human population structure and migration studies

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Global analysis of saliva as a source of bacterial genes for insights into human population structure and migration studies
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12862-014-0190-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karsten Henne, Jing Li, Mark Stoneking, Olga Kessler, Hildegard Schilling, Anne Sonanini, Georg Conrads, Hans-Peter Horz

Abstract

The genetic diversity of the human microbiome holds great potential for shedding light on the history of our ancestors. Helicobacter pylori is the most prominent example as its analysis allowed a fine-scale resolution of past migration patterns including some that could not be distinguished using human genetic markers. However studies of H. pylori require stomach biopsies, which severely limits the number of samples that can be analysed. By focussing on the house-keeping gene gdh (coding for the glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase), on the virulence gene gtf (coding for the glucosyltransferase) of mitis-streptococci and on the 16S-23S rRNA internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of the Fusobacterium nucleatum/periodonticum-group we here tested the hypothesis that bacterial genes from human saliva have the potential for distinguishing human populations.

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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Student > Master 6 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Professor 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 10 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 12 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 29 March 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#3,267
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,111
of 247,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#42
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 247,504 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.