| Title |
Next generation sequencing for characterizing biodiversity: promises and challenges
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genetica, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10709-015-9816-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
François Pompanon, Sarah Samadi |
| Abstract |
DNA barcoding approaches are used to describe biodiversity by analysing specimens or environmental samples in taxonomic, phylogenetic and ecological studies. While sharing data among these disciplines would be highly valuable, this remains difficult because of contradictory requirements. The properties making a DNA barcode efficient for specimen identification or species delimitation are hardly reconcilable with those required for a powerful analysis of degraded DNA from environmental samples. The use of next generation sequencing methods open up the way towards the development of new markers (e.g., multilocus barcodes) that would overcome such limitations. However, several challenges should be taken up for coordinating actions at the interface between taxonomy, ecology, molecular biology and bioinformatics in order to develop methods and protocols compatible with both taxonomic and ecological studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 156 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 42 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 14% |
| Unknown | 19 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 92 | 58% |
| Environmental Science | 17 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 2% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Unknown | 23 | 14% |
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 March 2015.
All research outputs
#17,737,508
of 22,778,347 outputs
Outputs from Genetica
#525
of 713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,390
of 351,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetica
#11
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,778,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 713 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 351,530 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.