↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the Fecal Microbiota: An Optimized Ion Torrent 16S rRNA Gene-Based Analysis Protocol

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
patent
7 patents
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
251 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
389 Mendeley
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.
Title
Assessing the Fecal Microbiota: An Optimized Ion Torrent 16S rRNA Gene-Based Analysis Protocol
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0068739
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian Milani, Arancha Hevia, Elena Foroni, Sabrina Duranti, Francesca Turroni, Gabriele Andrea Lugli, Borja Sanchez, Rebeca Martín, Miguel Gueimonde, Douwe van Sinderen, Abelardo Margolles, Marco Ventura

Abstract

Assessing the distribution of 16S rRNA gene sequences within a biological sample represents the current state-of-the-art for determination of human gut microbiota composition. Advances in dissecting the microbial biodiversity of this ecosystem have very much been dependent on the development of novel high-throughput DNA sequencing technologies, like the Ion Torrent. However, the precise representation of this bacterial community may be affected by the protocols used for DNA extraction as well as by the PCR primers employed in the amplification reaction. Here, we describe an optimized protocol for 16S rRNA gene-based profiling of the fecal microbiota.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 389 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 1%
Brazil 4 1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Uruguay 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 364 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 88 23%
Researcher 83 21%
Student > Master 44 11%
Student > Bachelor 32 8%
Student > Postgraduate 19 5%
Other 74 19%
Unknown 49 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 160 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 54 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 34 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 33 8%
Environmental Science 12 3%
Other 32 8%
Unknown 64 16%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 February 2024.
All research outputs
#2,792,146
of 24,953,268 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#34,709
of 216,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,911
of 200,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#834
of 4,782 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,953,268 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 216,204 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 200,108 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 4,782 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.