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 |
Estimating evolutionary distances between genomic sequences from spaced-word matches
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Algorithms for Molecular Biology, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13015-015-0032-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Burkhard Morgenstern, Bingyao Zhu, Sebastian Horwege, Chris André Leimeister |
| Abstract |
Alignment-free methods are increasingly used to calculate evolutionary distances between DNA and protein sequences as a basis of phylogeny reconstruction. Most of these methods, however, use heuristic distance functions that are not based on any explicit model of molecular evolution. Herein, we propose a simple estimator d N of the evolutionary distance between two DNA sequences that is calculated from the number N of (spaced) word matches between them. We show that this distance function is more accurate than other distance measures that are used by alignment-free methods. In addition, we calculate the variance of the normalized number N of (spaced) word matches. We show that the variance of N is smaller for spaced words than for contiguous words, and that the variance is further reduced if our spaced-words approach is used with multiple patterns of 'match positions' and 'don't care positions'. Our software is available online and as downloadable source code at: http://spaced.gobics.de/. |
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 | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 40 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 47% |
| Researcher | 6 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 18 | 42% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 14% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 19% |
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 05 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,325,004
of 22,792,160 outputs
Outputs from Algorithms for Molecular Biology
#148
of 264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,340
of 357,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Algorithms for Molecular Biology
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,792,160 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 264 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 357,821 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 61% of its contemporaries.