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 |
QTLs associated with dry matter intake, metabolic mid-test weight, growth and feed efficiency have little overlap across 4 beef cattle studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Genomics, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2164-15-1004 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mahdi Saatchi, Jonathan E Beever, Jared E Decker, Dan B Faulkner, Harvey C Freetly, Stephanie L Hansen, Helen Yampara-Iquise, Kristen A Johnson, Stephen D Kachman, Monty S Kerley, JaeWoo Kim, Daniel D Loy, Elisa Marques, Holly L Neibergs, E John Pollak, Robert D Schnabel, Christopher M Seabury, Daniel W Shike, Warren M Snelling, Matthew L Spangler, Robert L Weaber, Dorian J Garrick, Jeremy F Taylor |
| Abstract |
The identification of genetic markers associated with complex traits that are expensive to record such as feed intake or feed efficiency would allow these traits to be included in selection programs. To identify large-effect QTL, we performed a series of genome-wide association studies and functional analyses using 50 K and 770 K SNP genotypes scored in 5,133 animals from 4 independent beef cattle populations (Cycle VII, Angus, Hereford and Simmental×Angus) with phenotypes for average daily gain, dry matter intake, metabolic mid-test body weight and residual feed intake. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| Argentina | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 91 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 16% |
| Researcher | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 19% |
| Unknown | 18 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 57 | 60% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 5% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 26 | 27% |
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 10 January 2015.
All research outputs
#19,946,609
of 24,514,423 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#8,538
of 10,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,826
of 372,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#201
of 260 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,514,423 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 10,999 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. 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 372,356 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 260 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.