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 |
Optical sorting and cultivation of denitrifying anaerobic methane oxidation archaea.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomedical Optics Express, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1364/boe.8.000934 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiaoqiong Qi, David M Carberry, Chen Cai, Shihu Hu, Zhiguo Yuan, Halin Rubinsztein Dunlop, Jianhua Guo |
| Abstract |
Denitrifying anaerobic methane oxidizing (DAMO) microorganisms play an important role in the global carbon and nitrogen cycles as they are able to mediate methane oxidation using nitrite/nitrate under anoxic conditions. However, the physiological properties of DAMO microorganisms remain poorly understood, partially since the organisms are difficult to isolate or cultivate in pure culture and partially because of their long cultivation time. In this study, DAMO cell sorting has been conducted by integrating optical tweezers within enclosed microfluidic chips. This integrated cell sorting method has high purity, low infection rates, and causes no discernable harm to cell viability. The purity of the sorted cells was controlled by the microfluidic chip structure design and operation, while the cell viability was verified by imaging the cultured DAMO archaea after 420 days. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 56 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 18% |
| Engineering | 9 | 16% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 9% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 4 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 32% |
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 21 November 2017.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Optics Express
#1,873
of 3,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#304,474
of 421,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Optics Express
#40
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,045 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 421,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.