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 |
Linking microbial community structure, interactions and function in anaerobic digesters using new molecular techniques
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Opinion in Biotechnology, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.copbio.2013.11.004 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Inka Vanwonterghem, Paul D Jensen, Dang P Ho, Damien J Batstone, Gene W Tyson |
| Abstract |
Over the last decade there has been a rapid development in culture-independent techniques for exploring microbial communities, which have led to new insights into their structure and function in both natural environments and engineered systems. This review focuses on some of the most important recent advances and their applications to the diverse microbial communities associated with anaerobic digestion. The use of these approaches in combination with complementary imaging techniques, chemical isotope analyses and detailed reactor performance measurements provides a new opportunity to develop a fundamental understanding of how microbial community dynamics, interactions and functionality influence digester efficiency and stability. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 689 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 4 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 8 | 1% |
| Unknown | 668 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 174 | 25% |
| Researcher | 128 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 120 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 49 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 44 | 6% |
| Other | 96 | 14% |
| Unknown | 78 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 157 | 23% |
| Environmental Science | 139 | 20% |
| Engineering | 88 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 76 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 15 | 2% |
| Other | 75 | 11% |
| Unknown | 139 | 20% |
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 07 December 2013.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Current Opinion in Biotechnology
#2,532
of 2,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,184
of 320,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Opinion in Biotechnology
#31
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,750 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% 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 320,120 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.