↓ Skip to main content

Neolithic phylogenetic continuity inferred from complete mitochondrial DNA sequences in a tribal population of Southern India

Overview of attention for article published in Genetica, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Neolithic phylogenetic continuity inferred from complete mitochondrial DNA sequences in a tribal population of Southern India
Published in
Genetica, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10709-018-0030-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charles Sylvester, Mysore Siddaiah Krishna, Jaya Sankar Rao, Adimoolam Chandrasekar

Abstract

The subsequent human migrations that dispersed out of Africa, both prehistoric and historic and colonization of India by modern humans is unanimous, and phylogeny of major mitochondrial DNA haplogroups have played a key role in assessing the genetic origin of people of India. To address more such events, complete mitogenomes of 113 Melakudiya tribe of Southern India were sequenced and 46 individuals showed the presence of west Eurasian autochthonous haplogroups HV14 and U7. Phylogenetic analysis revealed two novel subclades HV14a1b and HV14a1b1 and sequences representing haplogroup U7 were included under previously described subclade U7a3a1a2* specific to India. Moreover, the present analysis on complete mtDNA reveals addition information of the spread and distribution of west Eurasian haplogroups in southern India, in tracing an unexplored genetic link between Melakudiya tribe with the people of Iranian Plateau, South Caucasus, and Central Asia. Coalescence ages of HV14 and U7a3a1a2* trees in the present study dates ~ 16.1 ± 4.3 and ~ 13.4 ± 5.6 kya respectively.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 20%
Student > Master 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Neuroscience 1 7%
Design 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,922,018
of 23,866,543 outputs
Outputs from Genetica
#440
of 713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,575
of 330,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetica
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,866,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 713 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 330,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.