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 |
OptPipe - a pipeline for optimizing metabolic engineering targets
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Systems Biology, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12918-017-0515-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
András Hartmann, Ana Vila-Santa, Nicolai Kallscheuer, Michael Vogt, Alice Julien-Laferrière, Marie-France Sagot, Jan Marienhagen, Susana Vinga |
| Abstract |
We propose OptPipe - a Pipeline for Optimizing Metabolic Engineering Targets, based on a consensus approach. The method generates consensus hypotheses for metabolic engineering applications by combining several optimization solutions obtained from distinct algorithms. The solutions are ranked according to several objectives, such as biomass and target production, by using the rank product tests corrected for multiple comparisons. OptPipe was applied in a genome-scale model of Corynebacterium glutamicum for maximizing malonyl-CoA, which is a valuable precursor for many phenolic compounds. In vivo experimental validation confirmed increased malonyl-CoA level in case of ΔsdhCAB deletion, as predicted in silico. A method was developed to combine the optimization solutions provided by common knockout prediction procedures and rank the suggested mutants according to the expected growth rate, production and a new adaptability measure. The implementation of the pipeline along with the complete documentation is freely available at https://github.com/AndrasHartmann/OptPipe . |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 24% |
| Researcher | 12 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 19% |
| Engineering | 5 | 9% |
| Chemical Engineering | 4 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 16 | 30% |
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 15 June 2021.
All research outputs
#4,216,383
of 24,723,421 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#111
of 1,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,864
of 451,070 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#8
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,723,421 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,132 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 451,070 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.