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 |
The callipyge mutation and other genes that affect muscle hypertrophy in sheep
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genetics Selection Evolution, December 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1297-9686-37-s1-s65 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Noelle E Cockett, Maria A Smit, Christopher A Bidwell, Karin Segers, Tracy L Hadfield, Gary D Snowder, Michel Georges, Carole Charlier |
| Abstract |
Genetic strategies to improve the profitability of sheep operations have generally focused on traits for reproduction. However, natural mutations exist in sheep that affect muscle growth and development, and the exploitation of these mutations in breeding strategies has the potential to significantly improve lamb-meat quality. The best-documented mutation for muscle development in sheep is callipyge (CLPG), which causes a postnatal muscle hypertrophy that is localized to the pelvic limbs and loin. Enhanced skeletal muscle growth is also observed in animals with the Carwell (or rib-eye muscling) mutation, and a double-muscling phenotype has been documented for animals of the Texel sheep breed. However, the actual mutations responsible for these muscular hypertrophy phenotypes in sheep have yet to be identified, and further characterization of the genetic basis for these phenotypes will provide insight into the biological control of muscle growth and body composition. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 33% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 67% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 14% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 10% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
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 07 July 2022.
All research outputs
#7,860,390
of 25,757,133 outputs
Outputs from Genetics Selection Evolution
#261
of 825 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,518
of 172,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics Selection Evolution
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,757,133 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 825 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 172,571 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 75% 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