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 |
A comprehensive comparison of four methods for extracting lipids from Arabidopsis tissues
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Plant Methods, December 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13007-020-00697-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cheka Kehelpannala, Thusitha W. T. Rupasinghe, Thomas Hennessy, David Bradley, Berit Ebert, Ute Roessner |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 4% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 26 | 51% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 12% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 29 | 57% |
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 01 March 2021.
All research outputs
#13,680,200
of 23,321,213 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#632
of 1,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,159
of 509,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#9
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,321,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,104 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 509,227 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 60% of its contemporaries.