↓ Skip to main content

Spatial and vertical distribution of bacterial community in the northern South China Sea

Overview of attention for article published in Ecotoxicology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Spatial and vertical distribution of bacterial community in the northern South China Sea
Published in
Ecotoxicology, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10646-015-1472-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fu-Lin Sun, You-Shao Wang, Mei-Lin Wu, Cui-Ci Sun, Hao Cheng

Abstract

Microbial communities are highly diverse in coastal oceans and response rapidly with changing environments. Learning about this will help us understand the ecology of microbial populations in marine ecosystems. This study aimed to assess the spatial and vertical distributions of the bacterial community in the northern South China Sea. Multi-dimensional scaling analyses revealed structural differences of the bacterial community among sampling sites and vertical depth. Result also indicated that bacterial community in most sites had higher diversity in 0-75 m depths than those in 100-200 m depths. Bacterial community of samples was positively correlation with salinity and depth, whereas was negatively correlation with temperature. Proteobacteria and Cyanobacteria were the dominant groups, which accounted for the majority of sequences. The α-Proteobacteria was highly diverse, and sequences belonged to Rhodobacterales bacteria were dominant in all characterized sequences. The current data indicate that the Rhodobacterales bacteria, especially Roseobacter clade are the diverse group in the tropical waters.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 33%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Unknown 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 20%
Environmental Science 2 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 13%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 3 20%
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 01 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,756,606
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Ecotoxicology
#726
of 1,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,365
of 263,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecotoxicology
#24
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 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 1,475 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 263,982 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 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.