| Title |
Ancient DNA: Methodological challenges
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, June 1994
|
| DOI | 10.1007/bf01921720 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
O. Handt, M. Höss, M. Krings, S. Pääbo |
| Abstract |
The study of ancient DNA offers the possibility of following genetic change over time. However, the field is plagued by a problem which is unique in molecular biology--the difficulty of verifying results by reproduction. Some of the reasons for this are technical and derive from the low copy number and damaged state of ancient DNA molecules. Other reasons are the unique nature of many of the objects from which DNA is extracted. We describe methodological approaches with which these problems can be alleviated in order to ensure that results are scientific in the sense that they can be reproduced by others. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 2 | 33% |
| Italy | 1 | 17% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 202 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Uruguay | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 186 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 40 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 39 | 19% |
| Researcher | 28 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 14% |
| Professor | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 32 | 16% |
| Unknown | 24 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 86 | 43% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 36 | 18% |
| Arts and Humanities | 13 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 20 | 10% |
| Unknown | 28 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 98. 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 15 November 2023.
All research outputs
#431,706
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#25
of 5,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71
of 20,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,877 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
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 20,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.