↓ Skip to main content

Globalizing Genomics: The Origins of the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the History of Biology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Globalizing Genomics: The Origins of the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration
Published in
Journal of the History of Biology, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10739-017-9490-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hallam Stevens

Abstract

Genomics is increasingly considered a global enterprise - the fact that biological information can flow rapidly around the planet is taken to be important to what genomics is and what it can achieve. However, the large-scale international circulation of nucleotide sequence information did not begin with the Human Genome Project. Efforts to formalize and institutionalize the circulation of sequence information emerged concurrently with the development of centralized facilities for collecting that information. That is, the very first databases build for collecting and sharing DNA sequence information were, from their outset, international collaborative enterprises. This paper describes the origins of the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration between GenBank in the United States, the European Molecular Biology Laboratory Databank, and the DNA Database of Japan. The technical and social groundwork for the international exchange of nucleotide sequences created the conditions of possibility for imagining nucleotide sequences (and subsequently genomes) as a "global" objects. The "transnationalism" of nucleotide sequence was critical to their ontology - what DNA sequences came to be during the Human Genome Project was deeply influenced by international exchange.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 20%
Unspecified 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 7 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 4 20%
Arts and Humanities 2 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 7 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 February 2018.
All research outputs
#19,838,704
of 24,378,498 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the History of Biology
#454
of 509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,493
of 327,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the History of Biology
#9
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,378,498 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 509 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 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 327,416 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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.