↓ Skip to main content

Use of the viral 2A peptide for bicistronic expression in transgenic mice

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Biology, September 2008
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter
patent
10 patents
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
181 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
508 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
Use of the viral 2A peptide for bicistronic expression in transgenic mice
Published in
BMC Biology, September 2008
DOI 10.1186/1741-7007-6-40
Pubmed ID
Authors

Georgios Trichas, Jo Begbie, Shankar Srinivas

Abstract

Transgenic animals are widely used in biomedical research and biotechnology. Multicistronic constructs, in which several proteins are encoded by a single messenger RNA, are commonly used in genetically engineered animals. This is currently done by using an internal ribosomal entry site to separate the different coding regions. 2A peptides result in the co-translational 'cleavage' of proteins and are an attractive alternative to the internal ribosomal entry site. They are more reliable than the internal ribosomal entry site and lead to expression of multiple cistrons at equimolar levels. They work in a wide variety of eukaryotic cells, but to date have not been demonstrated to function in transgenic mice in an inheritable manner.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 508 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 6 1%
United States 6 1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Belgium 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 8 2%
Unknown 476 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 134 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 132 26%
Student > Master 50 10%
Student > Bachelor 41 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 31 6%
Other 75 15%
Unknown 45 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 271 53%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 101 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 6%
Neuroscience 18 4%
Engineering 9 2%
Other 29 6%
Unknown 51 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 04 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,286,384
of 17,873,421 outputs
Outputs from BMC Biology
#393
of 1,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,487
of 225,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Biology
#17
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,873,421 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,549 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 225,968 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 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.