↓ Skip to main content

Archaeal community diversity in municipal waste landfill sites

Overview of attention for article published in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Archaeal community diversity in municipal waste landfill sites
Published in
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, March 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00253-015-6493-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liyan Song, Yangqing Wang, Wei Tang, Yu Lei

Abstract

Despite the pivotal role of archaea in methane production in landfills, the identity, ecology, and functional diversity of these microorganisms and their link to environmental factors remain largely unknown. We collected 11 landfill leachate samples from six geographically distinct landfills of different ages in China and analyzed the archaeal community by bar-coded 454 pyrosequencing. We retrieved 121,797 sequences from a total of 167,583 sequences (average length of 464 bp). The archaeal community was geographically structured, and nonabundant taxa primarily contributed to the observed dissimilarities. Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) suggested that the total phosphorous (TP), nitrate, and conductivity are important drivers for shaping the archaeal community. The hydrogenotrophic methanogens Methanomicrobiales and Methanobacteriales greatly dominated 9 of 11 samples, ranging from 83.7 to 99.5 %. These methanogens also dominated the remaining two samples, accounting for 70.3 and 58.8 %, respectively. Interestingly, for all of the studied Chinese landfills, 16S rRNA analysis indicated the predominance of hydrogenotrophic methanogens.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 29%
Student > Master 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Professor 4 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 24%
Environmental Science 8 20%
Engineering 5 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 March 2016.
All research outputs
#7,964,380
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#2,737
of 8,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,001
of 262,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#35
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,034 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 262,911 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 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 67% of its contemporaries.