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 |
Blood from a turnip: tissue origin of low-coverage shotgun sequencing libraries affects recovery of mitogenome sequences
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Mitochondrial DNA Part A, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3109/19401736.2013.840588 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
F. Keith Barker, Sara Oyler-McCance, Diana F. Tomback |
| Abstract |
abstract Next generation sequencing methods allow rapid, economical accumulation of data that have many applications, even at relatively low levels of genome coverage. However, the utility of shotgun sequencing data sets for specific goals may vary depending on the biological nature of the samples sequenced. We show that the ability to assemble mitogenomes from three avian samples of two different tissue types varies widely. In particular, data with coverage typical of microsatellite development efforts (∼1×) from DNA extracted from avian blood failed to cover even 50% of the mitogenome, relative to at least 500-fold coverage from muscle-derived data. Researchers should consider possible applications of their data and select the tissue source for their work accordingly. Practitioners analyzing low-coverage shotgun sequencing data (including for microsatellite locus development) should consider the potential benefits of mitogenome assembly, including internal barcode verification of species identity, mitochondrial primer development, and phylogenetics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 18% |
| Researcher | 3 | 18% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 4 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 59% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 12% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Mitochondrial DNA Part A
#485
of 1,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,192
of 224,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Mitochondrial DNA Part A
#7
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,995 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 224,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.