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 |
Gene loss in the fungal canola pathogen Leptosphaeria maculans
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Functional & Integrative Genomics, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10142-014-0412-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Agnieszka A. Golicz, Paula A. Martinez, Manuel Zander, Dhwani A. Patel, Angela P. Van De Wouw, Paul Visendi, Timothy L. Fitzgerald, David Edwards, Jacqueline Batley |
| Abstract |
Recent comparisons of the increasing number of genome sequences have revealed that variation in gene content is considerably more prevalent than previously thought. This variation is likely to have a pronounced effect on phenotypic diversity and represents a crucial target for the assessment of genomic diversity. Leptosphaeria maculans, a causative agent of phoma stem canker, is the most devastating fungal pathogen of Brassica napus (oilseed rape/canola). A number of L. maculans genes are known to be present in some isolates but lost in the others. We analyse gene content variation within three L. maculans isolates using a hybrid mapping and genome assembly approach and identify genes which are present in one of the isolates but missing in the others. In total, 57 genes are shown to be missing in at least one isolate. The genes encode proteins involved in a range of processes including oxidative processes, DNA maintenance, cell signalling and sexual reproduction. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of the method and provide new insight into genomic diversity in L. maculans. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 53% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
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 14 February 2017.
All research outputs
#18,384,336
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from Functional & Integrative Genomics
#285
of 501 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#261,926
of 361,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Functional & Integrative Genomics
#7
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 501 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 361,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.