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 |
Random shearing as an alternative to digestion for mitochondrial DNA processing in droplet digital PCR
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Mitochondrion, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.mito.2016.11.005 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrej Vitomirov, Miguel Ramirez-Gaona, Sanjay R. Mehta, Josué Pérez-Santiago |
| Abstract |
Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) is a quantitative assay that requires DNA fragmentation to maximize reaction efficiency. Here, we measured the proportion of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) carrying the "common deletion," a rare event, to compare quantification sensitivities between alternative DNA fragmentation methods (sonication and QIAshredder spin columns) against enzymatic digestion (traditionally used). QIAshredder showed the highest sensitivity when compared to sonication, followed by digestion. Also, both sonication and QIAshredder fragmentation had shorter processing times than enzymatic digestion; therefore, QIAshredder fragmentation and sonication are alternative DNA processing methods that maximize ddPCR quantification for the detection of rare events. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| China | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 18% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 18% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 9% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 41% |
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 28 December 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Mitochondrion
#545
of 889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,650
of 318,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Mitochondrion
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 318,857 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.