↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of the xylose reductase-xylitol dehydrogenase and the xylose isomerase pathways for xylose fermentation by recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Overview of attention for article published in Microbial Cell Factories, February 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

patent
5 patents
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
234 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
331 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
Comparison of the xylose reductase-xylitol dehydrogenase and the xylose isomerase pathways for xylose fermentation by recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Published in
Microbial Cell Factories, February 2007
DOI 10.1186/1475-2859-6-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kaisa Karhumaa, Rosa Garcia Sanchez, Bärbel Hahn-Hägerdal, Marie-F Gorwa-Grauslund

Abstract

Two heterologous pathways have been used to construct recombinant xylose-fermenting Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains: i) the xylose reductase (XR) and xylitol dehydrogenase (XDH) pathway and ii) the xylose isomerase (XI) pathway. In the present study, the Pichia stipitis XR-XDH pathway and the Piromyces XI pathway were compared in an isogenic strain background, using a laboratory host strain with genetic modifications known to improve xylose fermentation (overexpressed xylulokinase, overexpressed non-oxidative pentose phosphate pathway and deletion of the aldose reductase gene GRE3). The two isogenic strains and the industrial xylose-fermenting strain TMB 3400 were studied regarding their xylose fermentation capacity in defined mineral medium and in undetoxified lignocellulosic hydrolysate.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 331 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 316 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 66 20%
Researcher 65 20%
Student > Master 59 18%
Student > Bachelor 38 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 5%
Other 41 12%
Unknown 44 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 148 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 62 19%
Engineering 26 8%
Chemical Engineering 13 4%
Chemistry 13 4%
Other 17 5%
Unknown 52 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 30 January 2018.
All research outputs
#3,272,274
of 22,787,797 outputs
Outputs from Microbial Cell Factories
#148
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,402
of 160,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbial Cell Factories
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,787,797 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 1,597 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 160,648 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.