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 |
Reprogramming and development in nuclear transfer embryos and in interspecific systems
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.gde.2012.09.002 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick Narbonne, Kei Miyamoto, JB Gurdon |
| Abstract |
Nuclear transfer (NT) remains the most effective method to reprogram somatic cells to totipotency. Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) efficiency however remains low, but recurrent problems occurring in partially reprogrammed cloned embryos have recently been identified and some remedied. In particular, the trophectoderm has been identified as a lineage whose reprogramming success has a large influence on SCNT embryo development. Several interspecific hybrid and cybrid reprogramming systems have been developed as they offer various technical advantages and potential applications, and together with SCNT, they have led to the identification of a series of reprogramming events and responsible reprogramming factors. Interspecific incompatibilities hinder full exploitation of cross-species reprogramming systems, yet recent findings suggest that these may not constitute insurmountable obstacles. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 19% |
| Researcher | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 10% |
| Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 19% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 25 | 52% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 9 | 19% |
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 27 March 2015.
All research outputs
#3,120,644
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Current Opinion in Genetics & Development
#247
of 1,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,168
of 191,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Opinion in Genetics & Development
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 1,740 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 191,740 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 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.