↓ Skip to main content

The grapevine gene nomenclature system

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 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
The grapevine gene nomenclature system
Published in
BMC Genomics, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-15-1077
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jérôme Grimplet, Anne-Françoise Adam-Blondon, Pierre-François Bert, Oliver Bitz, Dario Cantu, Christopher Davies, Serge Delrot, Mario Pezzotti, Stéphane Rombauts, Grant R Cramer

Abstract

Grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) is one of the most important fruit crops in the world and serves as a valuable model for fruit development in woody species. A major breakthrough in grapevine genomics was achieved in 2007 with the sequencing of the Vitis vinifera cv. PN40024 genome. Subsequently, data on structural and functional characterization of grape genes accumulated exponentially. To better exploit the results obtained by the international community, we think that a coordinated nomenclature for gene naming in species with sequenced genomes is essential. It will pave the way for the accumulation of functional data that will enable effective scientific discussion and discovery. The exploitation of data that were generated independently of the genome release is hampered by their heterogeneous nature and by often incompatible and decentralized storage. Classically, large amounts of data describing gene functions are only available in printed articles and therefore remain hardly accessible for automatic text mining. On the other hand, high throughput "Omics" data are typically stored in public repositories, but should be arranged in compendia to better contribute to the annotation and functional characterization of the genes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters 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 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
New Zealand 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Uruguay 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 101 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 30 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 10%
Other 7 7%
Student > Master 7 7%
Other 22 21%
Unknown 11 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 75 71%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 9%
Computer Science 2 2%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 14 13%

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 06 December 2016.
All research outputs
#9,906,324
of 12,373,620 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#5,666
of 7,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,405
of 275,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#221
of 260 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,620 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 7,313 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 275,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 260 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.