↓ Skip to main content

Diatom frustules protect DNA from ultraviolet light

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
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.
Title
Diatom frustules protect DNA from ultraviolet light
Published in
Scientific Reports, March 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41598-018-21810-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luis Ever Aguirre, Liangqi Ouyang, Anders Elfwing, Mikael Hedblom, Angela Wulff, Olle Inganäs

Abstract

The evolutionary causes for generation of nano and microstructured silica by photosynthetic algae are not yet deciphered. Diatoms are single photosynthetic algal cells populating the oceans and waters around the globe. They generate a considerable fraction (20-30%) of all oxygen from photosynthesis, and 45% of total primary production of organic material in the sea. There are more than 100,000 species of diatoms, classified by the shape of the glass cage in which they live, and which they build during algal growth. These glass structures have accumulated for the last 100 million of years, and left rich deposits of nano/microstructured silicon oxide in the form of diatomaceous earth around the globe. Here we show that reflection of ultraviolet light by nanostructured silica can protect the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) in the algal cells, and that this may be an evolutionary cause for the formation of glass cages.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users 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 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 114 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 17%
Researcher 17 15%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Other 6 5%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 31 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 20%
Chemistry 11 10%
Environmental Science 10 9%
Physics and Astronomy 8 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 5%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 40 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 May 2021.
All research outputs
#4,074,541
of 24,701,106 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#32,586
of 134,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,783
of 336,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#868
of 3,444 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,701,106 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 134,919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 336,320 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,444 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.