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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Rapid phylogenetic and functional classification of short genomic fragments with signature peptides
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-0500-5-460 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joel Berendzen, William J Bruno, Judith D Cohn, Nicolas W Hengartner, Cheryl R Kuske, Benjamin H McMahon, Murray A Wolinsky, Gary Xie |
| Abstract |
Classification is difficult for shotgun metagenomics data from environments such as soils, where the diversity of sequences is high and where reference sequences from close relatives may not exist. Approaches based on sequence-similarity scores must deal with the confounding effects that inheritance and functional pressures exert on the relation between scores and phylogenetic distance, while approaches based on sequence alignment and tree-building are typically limited to a small fraction of gene families. We describe an approach based on finding one or more exact matches between a read and a precomputed set of peptide 10-mers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 28% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 17% |
| India | 2 | 11% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 6% |
| Russia | 1 | 6% |
| France | 1 | 6% |
| Cameroon | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 67% |
| Scientists | 5 | 28% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 8% |
| Brazil | 3 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| Sweden | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Finland | 1 | 1% |
| Denmark | 1 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 61 | 79% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 27 | 35% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 16% |
| Professor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 38 | 49% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 8% |
| Mathematics | 4 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 30 May 2013.
All research outputs
#2,985,629
of 24,673,288 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#403
of 4,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,562
of 176,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#13
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,673,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 176,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.