↓ Skip to main content

Comprehensive molecular, genomic and phenotypic analysis of a major clone of Enterococcus faecalis MLST ST40

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 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
Comprehensive molecular, genomic and phenotypic analysis of a major clone of Enterococcus faecalis MLST ST40
Published in
BMC Genomics, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12864-015-1367-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melanie Zischka, Carsten T Künne, Jochen Blom, Dominique Wobser, Türkân Sakιnç, Kerstin Schmidt-Hohagen, P Wojtek Dabrowski, Andreas Nitsche, Johannes Hübner, Torsten Hain, Trinad Chakraborty, Burkhard Linke, Alexander Goesmann, Sonja Voget, Rolf Daniel, Dietmar Schomburg, Rüdiger Hauck, Hafez M Hafez, Petra Tielen, Dieter Jahn, Margrete Solheim, Ewa Sadowy, Jesper Larsen, Lars B Jensen, Patricia Ruiz-Garbajosa, Dianelys Quiñones Pérez, Theresa Mikalsen, Jennifer Bender, Matthias Steglich, Ulrich Nübel, Wolfgang Witte, Guido Werner

Abstract

Enterococcus faecalis is a multifaceted microorganism known to act as a beneficial intestinal commensal bacterium. It is also a dreaded nosocomial pathogen causing life-threatening infections in hospitalised patients. Isolates of a distinct MLST type ST40 represent the most frequent strain type of this species, distributed worldwide and originating from various sources (animal, human, environmental) and different conditions (colonisation/infection). Since enterococci are known to be highly recombinogenic we determined to analyse the microevolution and niche adaptation of this highly distributed clonal type.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 132 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 15%
Student > Master 19 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Other 8 6%
Other 20 15%
Unknown 28 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 23%
Immunology and Microbiology 17 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 6%
Computer Science 5 4%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 39 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 August 2015.
All research outputs
#6,938,202
of 24,792,414 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#2,855
of 11,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,411
of 264,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#86
of 291 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,792,414 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,067 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 264,106 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 291 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 70% of its contemporaries.