↓ Skip to main content

Bioconcrete: next generation of self-healing concrete

Overview of attention for article published in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
279 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
657 Mendeley
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.
Title
Bioconcrete: next generation of self-healing concrete
Published in
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00253-016-7316-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mostafa Seifan, Ali Khajeh Samani, Aydin Berenjian

Abstract

Concrete is one of the most widely used construction materials and has a high tendency to form cracks. These cracks lead to significant reduction in concrete service life and high replacement costs. Although it is not possible to prevent crack formation, various types of techniques are in place to heal the cracks. It has been shown that some of the current concrete treatment methods such as the application of chemicals and polymers are a source of health and environmental risks, and more importantly, they are effective only in the short term. Thus, treatment methods that are environmentally friendly and long-lasting are in high demand. A microbial self-healing approach is distinguished by its potential for long-lasting, rapid and active crack repair, while also being environmentally friendly. Furthermore, the microbial self-healing approach prevails the other treatment techniques due to the efficient bonding capacity and compatibility with concrete compositions. This study provides an overview of the microbial approaches to produce calcium carbonate (CaCO3). Prospective challenges in microbial crack treatment are discussed, and recommendations are also given for areas of future research.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Lithuania 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 654 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 95 14%
Student > Master 83 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 75 11%
Researcher 37 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 3%
Other 75 11%
Unknown 274 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 200 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 3%
Environmental Science 19 3%
Materials Science 18 3%
Other 68 10%
Unknown 303 46%
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 15 April 2023.
All research outputs
#6,337,490
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#2,290
of 8,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,638
of 404,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#28
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 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 8,034 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 404,533 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.