| Title |
NCBI BLAST+ integrated into Galaxy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Giga Science, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13742-015-0080-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter J. A. Cock, John M. Chilton, Björn Grüning, James E. Johnson, Nicola Soranzo |
| Abstract |
The NCBI BLAST suite has become ubiquitous in modern molecular biology and is used for small tasks such as checking capillary sequencing results of single PCR products, genome annotation or even larger scale pan-genome analyses. For early adopters of the Galaxy web-based biomedical data analysis platform, integrating BLAST into Galaxy was a natural step for sequence comparison workflows. The command line NCBI BLAST+ tool suite was wrapped for use within Galaxy. Appropriate datatypes were defined as needed. The integration of the BLAST+ tool suite into Galaxy has the goal of making common BLAST tasks easy and advanced tasks possible. This project is an informal international collaborative effort, and is deployed and used on Galaxy servers worldwide. Several examples of applications are described here. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 States | 5 | 21% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 13% |
| Canada | 3 | 13% |
| Japan | 2 | 8% |
| Comoros | 1 | 4% |
| Denmark | 1 | 4% |
| Italy | 1 | 4% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 4% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 54% |
| Scientists | 9 | 38% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 209 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 201 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 14% |
| Researcher | 30 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 24 | 11% |
| Unknown | 52 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 57 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 54 | 26% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 11 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 11 | 5% |
| Engineering | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 6% |
| Unknown | 59 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 26 August 2021.
All research outputs
#1,532,273
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Giga Science
#265
of 1,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,094
of 279,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Giga Science
#7
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,167 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 279,402 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 56% of its contemporaries.