↓ Skip to main content

Whole-genome sequencing and identification of Morganella morganii KT pathogenicity-related genes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
Whole-genome sequencing and identification of Morganella morganii KT pathogenicity-related genes
Published in
BMC Genomics, December 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-13-s7-s4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu-Tin Chen, Hwei-Ling Peng, Wei-Chung Shia, Fang-Rong Hsu, Chuian-Fu Ken, Yu-Ming Tsao, Chang-Hua Chen, Chun-Eng Liu, Ming-Feng Hsieh, Huang-Chi Chen, Chuan-Yi Tang, Tien-Hsiung Ku

Abstract

The opportunistic enterobacterium, Morganella morganii, which can cause bacteraemia, is the ninth most prevalent cause of clinical infections in patients at Changhua Christian Hospital, Taiwan. The KT strain of M. morganii was isolated during postoperative care of a cancer patient with a gallbladder stone who developed sepsis caused by bacteraemia. M. morganii is sometimes encountered in nosocomial settings and has been causally linked to catheter-associated bacteriuria, complex infections of the urinary and/or hepatobiliary tracts, wound infection, and septicaemia. M. morganii infection is associated with a high mortality rate, although most patients respond well to appropriate antibiotic therapy. To obtain insights into the genome biology of M. morganii and the mechanisms underlying its pathogenicity, we used Illumina technology to sequence the genome of the KT strain and compared its sequence with the genome sequences of related bacteria.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 97 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 15%
Student > Master 13 13%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 22 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 5%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 27 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 August 2021.
All research outputs
#7,454,427
of 22,789,566 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#3,597
of 10,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,983
of 279,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#157
of 381 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,789,566 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,647 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 279,157 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 381 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.