↓ Skip to main content

SNP mining in C. clementina BAC end sequences; transferability in the Citrus genus (Rutaceae), phylogenetic inferences and perspectives for genetic mapping

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, January 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 (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
121 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
SNP mining in C. clementina BAC end sequences; transferability in the Citrus genus (Rutaceae), phylogenetic inferences and perspectives for genetic mapping
Published in
BMC Genomics, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-13-13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrick Ollitrault, Javier Terol, Andres Garcia-Lor, Aurélie Bérard, Aurélie Chauveau, Yann Froelicher, Caroline Belzile, Raphaël Morillon, Luis Navarro, Dominique Brunel, Manuel Talon

Abstract

With the increasing availability of EST databases and whole genome sequences, SNPs have become the most abundant and powerful polymorphic markers. However, SNP chip data generally suffers from ascertainment biases caused by the SNP discovery and selection process in which a small number of individuals are used as discovery panels. The ongoing International Citrus Genome Consortium sequencing project of the highly heterozygous Clementine and sweet orange genomes will soon result in the release of several hundred thousand SNPs. The primary goals of this study were: (i) to estimate the transferability within the genus Citrus of SNPs discovered from Clementine BACend sequencing (BES), (ii) to estimate bias associated with the very narrow discovery panel, and (iii) to evaluate the usefulness of the Clementine-derived SNP markers for diversity analysis and comparative mapping studies between the different cultivated Citrus species.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 3%
India 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 62 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 20%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 15 23%
Unknown 6 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 64%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Engineering 2 3%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 7 11%
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 07 May 2018.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#3,907
of 11,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,338
of 248,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#47
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,244 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 58% 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 248,792 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 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 55% of its contemporaries.