↓ Skip to main content

Analysis of CLIP and iCLIP methods for nucleotide-resolution studies of protein-RNA interactions

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology (Online Edition), January 2012
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 (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 tweeters
patent
2 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
182 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
337 Mendeley
citeulike
5 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
Analysis of CLIP and iCLIP methods for nucleotide-resolution studies of protein-RNA interactions
Published in
Genome Biology (Online Edition), January 2012
DOI 10.1186/gb-2012-13-8-r67
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoichiro Sugimoto, Julian König, Shobbir Hussain, Blaž Zupan, Tomaž Curk, Michaela Frye, Jernej Ule

Abstract

ABSTRACT: UV cross-linking and immunoprecipitation (CLIP) and individual-nucleotide resolution CLIP (iCLIP) are methods to study protein-RNA interactions in untreated cells and tissues. Here, we analyzed six published and two novel data sets to confirm that both methods identify protein-RNA cross-link sites, and to identify a slight uridine preference of UV-C-induced cross-linking. Comparing Nova CLIP and iCLIP data revealed that cDNA deletions have a preference for TTT motifs, whereas iCLIP cDNA truncations are more likely to identify clusters of YCAY motifs as the primary Nova binding sites. In conclusion, we demonstrate how each method impacts the analysis of protein-RNA binding specificity.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 337 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
Germany 4 1%
Austria 3 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 318 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 104 31%
Researcher 73 22%
Student > Master 37 11%
Student > Bachelor 31 9%
Professor 19 6%
Other 43 13%
Unknown 30 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 153 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 92 27%
Computer Science 13 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 10 3%
Chemistry 9 3%
Other 26 8%
Unknown 34 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 January 2017.
All research outputs
#1,453,266
of 21,338,376 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#1,355
of 4,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,775
of 143,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,338,376 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 4,004 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 143,634 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 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.