↓ Skip to main content

Mutanalyst, an online tool for assessing the mutational spectrum of epPCR libraries with poor sampling

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Mutanalyst, an online tool for assessing the mutational spectrum of epPCR libraries with poor sampling
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-0996-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matteo Paolo Ferla

Abstract

Assessing library diversity is an important control step in a directed evolution experiment. To do this, a limited amount of colonies from a test library are sequenced and tested. In the case of an error-prone PCR library, the spectrum of the identified mutations - the proportions of mutations of a specific nucleobase to another- is calculated enabling the user to make more informed predictions on library diversity and coverage. However, the calculations of the mutational spectrum are severely affected by the limited sample sizes. Here an online program, called Mutanalyst, is presented, which not only automates the calculations, but also estimates errors involved. Specifically, the errors are calculated thanks to the complementarity of DNA, which means that a mutation has a complementary mutation on the other sequence. Additionally, in the case of determining the mean number of mutations per sequence it does so by fitting to a Poisson distribution, which is more robust than calculating the average in light of the small sampling size. As a result of the added measures to keep into account of small sample size the user can better assess whether the library is satisfactory or whether error-prone PCR conditions should be adjusted. The program is available at www.mutanalyst.com .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 21%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 6 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Chemistry 2 5%
Computer Science 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 8 19%
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 29 July 2016.
All research outputs
#12,890,894
of 22,860,626 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#3,766
of 7,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,770
of 300,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#58
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,860,626 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 7,293 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 300,360 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.