↓ Skip to main content

Undefined cellulase formulations hinder scientific reproducibility

Overview of attention for article published in Biotechnology for Biofuels, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 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
Undefined cellulase formulations hinder scientific reproducibility
Published in
Biotechnology for Biofuels, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13068-017-0974-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael E. Himmel, Charles A. Abbas, John O. Baker, Edward A. Bayer, Yannick J. Bomble, Roman Brunecky, Xiaowen Chen, Claus Felby, Tina Jeoh, Rajeev Kumar, Barry V. McCleary, Brett I. Pletschke, Melvin P. Tucker, Charles E. Wyman, Stephen R. Decker

Abstract

In the shadow of a burgeoning biomass-to-fuels industry, biological conversion of lignocellulose to fermentable sugars in a cost-effective manner is key to the success of second-generation and advanced biofuel production. For the effective comparison of one cellulase preparation to another, cellulase assays are typically carried out with one or more engineered cellulase formulations or natural exoproteomes of known performance serving as positive controls. When these formulations have unknown composition, as is the case with several widely used commercial products, it becomes impossible to compare or reproduce work done today to work done in the future, where, for example, such preparations may not be available. Therefore, being a critical tenet of science publishing, experimental reproducibility is endangered by the continued use of these undisclosed products. We propose the introduction of standard procedures and materials to produce specific and reproducible cellulase formulations. These formulations are to serve as yardsticks to measure improvements and performance of new cellulase formulations.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Student > Master 3 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 11 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 12%
Chemical Engineering 4 9%
Engineering 4 9%
Computer Science 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 14 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 16 February 2018.
All research outputs
#1,871,409
of 12,519,038 outputs
Outputs from Biotechnology for Biofuels
#153
of 963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,352
of 382,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biotechnology for Biofuels
#11
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,519,038 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 963 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 382,312 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.