| Title |
Inediibacterium massiliense gen. nov., sp. nov., a new bacterial species isolated from the gut microbiota of a severely malnourished infant
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10482-017-0843-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maryam Tidjani Alou, Jaishriram Rathored, Caroline Michelle, Gregory Dubourg, Claudia Andrieu, Nicholas Armstrong, Cheikh Sokhna, Aldiouma Diallo, Didier Raoult, Pierre-Edouard Fournier |
| Abstract |
A novel strain, Mt12(T) (=CSUR P1907 = DSM 100590), was isolated from the fecal sample of a 7-month-old girl from Senegal afflicted with severe acute malnutrition. This bacterium is a strictly anaerobic, spore-forming Gram-stain positive bacillus. The major cellular fatty acid was identified as tetradecanoic acid. Its 16S rRNA gene sequence exhibited 94.9% similarity with that of Crassaminicella profunda strain Ra1766H(T), currently the closest species with a validly published name. The draft genome of strain Mt12(T) is 3,497,275-bp long with a 30.45% of G+C content. 3397 genes were predicted, including 3268 protein-coding genes and 129 RNAs, including eight 16S rRNAs. Genomic comparison with closely related species with an available genome showed a lower quantitative genomic content. The phylogenetic analysis alongside the dDDH values under 30% and phenotypic characteristics suggest that strain Mt12(T) represents a new genus within the family Clostridiaceae, for which the name Inediibacterium massiliense gen. nov., sp. nov. is proposed. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Denmark | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 31% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 9 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 7% |
| Engineering | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 10 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 2021.
All research outputs
#2,467,456
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Antonie van Leeuwenhoek
#90
of 2,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,583
of 424,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antonie van Leeuwenhoek
#1
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,032 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 424,210 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.