You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Isolation and identification of biocellulose‐producing bacterial strains from Malaysian acidic fruits
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Letters in Applied Microbiology, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1111/lam.12568 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
W.W.Y. Voon, Y. Rukayadi, A.S. Meor Hussin |
| Abstract |
Biocellulose (BC) is pure extracellular cellulose produced by several species of microorganisms that has numerous applications in the food, biomedical and paper industries. However, the existing biocellulose-producing bacterial strain with high yield was limited. The aim of this study was to isolate and identify the potential biocellulose-producing bacterial isolates from Malaysian acidic fruits. 193 bacterial isolates were obtained from 19 local acidic fruits collected in Malaysia and screened for their ability to produce biocellulose. A total of 15 potential bacterial isolates were then cultured in standard Hestrin-Schramm (HS) medium statically at 30°C for two weeks to determine the biocellulose production. The most potent bacterial isolates were identified using 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis, morphological and biochemical characteristics. Three new and potent biocellulose-producing bacterial strains were isolated from soursop fruit and identified as Stenotrophomonas maltophilia WAUPM42, Pantoea vagans WAUPM45 and Beijerinckia fluminensis WAUPM53. Stenotrophomonas maltophilia WAUPM42 was the most potent biocellulose-producing bacterial strain that produced the highest amount of biocellulose 0.58 g l(-1) in standard HS medium. Whereas, the isolates Pantoea vagans WAUPM45 and Beijerinckia fluminensis WAUPM53 showed 0.50 g l(-1) and 0.52 g l(-1) of biocellulose production, respectively. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 83 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 35 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 13% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 42 | 51% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 22 March 2016.
All research outputs
#6,597,909
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Letters in Applied Microbiology
#560
of 2,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,118
of 315,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Letters in Applied Microbiology
#8
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,266 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. 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 315,832 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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 52% of its contemporaries.