↓ Skip to main content

Characterization and potential functional significance of human-chimpanzee large INDEL variation

Overview of attention for article published in Mobile DNA, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#16 of 299)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
11 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Characterization and potential functional significance of human-chimpanzee large INDEL variation
Published in
Mobile DNA, October 2011
DOI 10.1186/1759-8753-2-13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nalini Polavarapu, Gaurav Arora, Vinay K Mittal, John F McDonald

Abstract

Although humans and chimpanzees have accumulated significant differences in a number of phenotypic traits since diverging from a common ancestor about six million years ago, their genomes are more than 98.5% identical at protein-coding loci. This modest degree of nucleotide divergence is not sufficient to explain the extensive phenotypic differences between the two species. It has been hypothesized that the genetic basis of the phenotypic differences lies at the level of gene regulation and is associated with the extensive insertion and deletion (INDEL) variation between the two species. To test the hypothesis that large INDELs (80 to 12,000 bp) may have contributed significantly to differences in gene regulation between the two species, we categorized human-chimpanzee INDEL variation mapping in or around genes and determined whether this variation is significantly correlated with previously determined differences in gene expression.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 8%
Indonesia 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Norway 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 41 82%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 32%
Researcher 10 20%
Other 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Professor 4 8%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 2 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 66%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 4 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 25 October 2020.
All research outputs
#1,225,270
of 19,206,351 outputs
Outputs from Mobile DNA
#16
of 299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,804
of 127,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Mobile DNA
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,206,351 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 299 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 127,722 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them