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 |
Comparison of three DNA extraction methods for the detection and quantification of GMO in Ecuadorian manufactured food
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-017-3083-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ricardo Pacheco Coello, Jorge Pestana Justo, Andrés Factos Mendoza, Efrén Santos Ordoñez |
| Abstract |
In Ecuador, food products need to be labeled if exceeded 0.9% of transgenic content in whole products. For the detection of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), three DNA extraction methods were tested in 35 food products commercialized in Ecuador. Samples with positive amplification of endogenous genes were screened for the presence of the Cauliflower mosaic virus 35S-promoter (P35S) and the nopaline synthase-terminator (Tnos). TaqMan™ probes were used for determination of transgenic content of the GTS 40-3-2 and MON810 events through quantitative PCR (qPCR). Twenty-six processed food samples were positive for the P35S alone and eight samples for the Tnos and P35S. Absolute qPCR results indicated that eleven samples were positive for GTS 40-3-2 specific event and two for MON810 specific event. A total of nine samples for events GTS 40-3-2 and MON810 exceeded the umbral allowed of transgenic content in the whole food product with the specific events. Different food products may require different DNA extraction protocols for GMO detection through PCR. Among the three methods tested, the DNeasy mericon food kit DNA extraction method obtained higher proportion of amplified endogenous genes through PCR. Finally, event-specific GMOs were detected in food products in Ecuador. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 71 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 21% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 4% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 33 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 35 | 49% |
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 07 August 2018.
All research outputs
#17,923,510
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#2,849
of 4,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#308,722
of 440,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#115
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 440,645 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.