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 |
Fast-evolving noncoding sequences in the human genome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, June 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1186/gb-2007-8-6-r118 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christine P Bird, Barbara E Stranger, Maureen Liu, Daryl J Thomas, Catherine E Ingle, Claude Beazley, Webb Miller, Matthew E Hurles, Emmanouil T Dermitzakis |
| Abstract |
Gene regulation is considered one of the driving forces of evolution. Although protein-coding DNA sequences and RNA genes have been subject to recent evolutionary events in the human lineage, it has been hypothesized that the large phenotypic divergence between humans and chimpanzees has been driven mainly by changes in gene regulation rather than altered protein-coding gene sequences. Comparative analysis of vertebrate genomes has revealed an abundance of evolutionarily conserved but noncoding sequences. These conserved noncoding (CNC) sequences may well harbor critical regulatory variants that have driven recent human evolution. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 178 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 53 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 48 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 29 | 15% |
| Unknown | 19 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 89 | 46% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 50 | 26% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 3% |
| Mathematics | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 5% |
| Unknown | 25 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,552,080
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,045
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,746
of 79,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#5
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 79,977 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.