↓ Skip to main content

Using biological networks to integrate, visualize and analyze genomics data

Overview of attention for article published in Genetics Selection Evolution, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
84 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
218 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Using biological networks to integrate, visualize and analyze genomics data
Published in
Genetics Selection Evolution, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12711-016-0205-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Theodosia Charitou, Kenneth Bryan, David J. Lynn

Abstract

Network biology is a rapidly developing area of biomedical research and reflects the current view that complex phenotypes, such as disease susceptibility, are not the result of single gene mutations that act in isolation but are rather due to the perturbation of a gene's network context. Understanding the topology of these molecular interaction networks and identifying the molecules that play central roles in their structure and regulation is a key to understanding complex systems. The falling cost of next-generation sequencing is now enabling researchers to routinely catalogue the molecular components of these networks at a genome-wide scale and over a large number of different conditions. In this review, we describe how to use publicly available bioinformatics tools to integrate genome-wide 'omics' data into a network of experimentally-supported molecular interactions. In addition, we describe how to visualize and analyze these networks to identify topological features of likely functional relevance, including network hubs, bottlenecks and modules. We show that network biology provides a powerful conceptual approach to integrate and find patterns in genome-wide genomic data but we also discuss the limitations and caveats of these methods, of which researchers adopting these methods must remain aware.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 218 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
France 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 211 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 52 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 18%
Student > Master 28 13%
Student > Bachelor 19 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 4%
Other 25 11%
Unknown 46 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 63 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 60 28%
Computer Science 11 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 3%
Engineering 6 3%
Other 25 11%
Unknown 47 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 2016.
All research outputs
#6,882,997
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Genetics Selection Evolution
#208
of 820 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,413
of 315,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics Selection Evolution
#2
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 820 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 315,449 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.