↓ Skip to main content

Comparative skin transcriptome of two Oujiang color common carp (Cyprinus carpio var. color) varieties

Overview of attention for article published in Fish Physiology and Biochemistry, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Comparative skin transcriptome of two Oujiang color common carp (Cyprinus carpio var. color) varieties
Published in
Fish Physiology and Biochemistry, August 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10695-018-0551-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jinxing Du, Xiaowen Chen, Jun Wang, Honglin Chen, Wucheng Yue, Guoqing Lu, Chenghui Wang

Abstract

Body color variation has long been a hot research topic in evolutionary and functional biology. Oujiang color common carp (Cyprinus carpio var. color) is a well-known economical and ornamental fish. Three main types of pigments and four distinct color patterns are typical characters of Oujiang color common carp, which makes it an excellent fish model to study body coloration. In this study, skin transcriptome assembly and comparisons were conducted in two Oujiang color common carp varieties: whole red and whole white. Transcriptome comparison revealed that more differentially expressed energy metabolism genes were upregulated in whole white compared to whole red. The results indicated that energy metabolism genes might be strongly associated with environmental adaption and growth performance and likely affect the red and white color formation in Oujiang color common carp. Our study provided direct guidance for the aquaculture industrials of Oujiang color common carp and presented valuable genetic resources for body color research in fish.

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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Researcher 3 11%
Other 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 13 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 43%
Unspecified 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Unknown 13 46%
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 05 June 2019.
All research outputs
#15,543,612
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from Fish Physiology and Biochemistry
#252
of 867 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,447
of 334,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Fish Physiology and Biochemistry
#6
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 867 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 334,198 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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 64% of its contemporaries.