↓ Skip to main content

Current advances in molecular methods for detection of nitrite-dependent anaerobic methane oxidizing bacteria in natural environments

Overview of attention for article published in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Current advances in molecular methods for detection of nitrite-dependent anaerobic methane oxidizing bacteria in natural environments
Published in
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00253-016-7853-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jing Chen, Richard Dick, Jih-Gaw Lin, Ji-Dong Gu

Abstract

Nitrite-dependent anaerobic methane oxidation (n-damo) process uniquely links microbial nitrogen and carbon cycles. Research on n-damo bacteria progresses quickly with experimental evidences through enrichment cultures. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based methods for detecting them in various natural ecosystems and engineered systems play a very important role in the discovery of their distribution, abundance, and biodiversity in the ecosystems. Important characteristics of n-damo enrichments were obtained and their key significance in microbial nitrogen and carbon cycles was investigated. The molecular methods currently used in detecting n-damo bacteria were comprehensively reviewed and discussed for their strengths and limitations in applications with a wide range of samples. The pmoA gene-based PCR primers for n-damo bacterial detection were evaluated and, in particular, several incorrectly stated PCR primer nucleotide sequences in the published papers were also pointed out to allow correct applications of the PCR primers in current and future investigations. Furthermore, this review also offers the future perspectives of n-damo bacteria based on current information and methods available for a better acquisition of new knowledge about this group of bacteria.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 57 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 24%
Student > Master 7 12%
Other 4 7%
Researcher 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 18 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 15%
Engineering 6 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 18 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 October 2016.
All research outputs
#18,922,529
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#6,246
of 8,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,015
of 320,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#60
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,034 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 320,436 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.