↓ Skip to main content

PhyloSift: phylogenetic analysis of genomes and metagenomes

Overview of attention for article published in PeerJ, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
twitter
63 X users
peer_reviews
2 peer review sites
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
565 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
808 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
PhyloSift: phylogenetic analysis of genomes and metagenomes
Published in
PeerJ, January 2014
DOI 10.7717/peerj.243
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aaron E. Darling, Guillaume Jospin, Eric Lowe, Frederick A. Matsen, Holly M. Bik, Jonathan A. Eisen

Abstract

Like all organisms on the planet, environmental microbes are subject to the forces of molecular evolution. Metagenomic sequencing provides a means to access the DNA sequence of uncultured microbes. By combining DNA sequencing of microbial communities with evolutionary modeling and phylogenetic analysis we might obtain new insights into microbiology and also provide a basis for practical tools such as forensic pathogen detection. In this work we present an approach to leverage phylogenetic analysis of metagenomic sequence data to conduct several types of analysis. First, we present a method to conduct phylogeny-driven Bayesian hypothesis tests for the presence of an organism in a sample. Second, we present a means to compare community structure across a collection of many samples and develop direct associations between the abundance of certain organisms and sample metadata. Third, we apply new tools to analyze the phylogenetic diversity of microbial communities and again demonstrate how this can be associated to sample metadata. These analyses are implemented in an open source software pipeline called PhyloSift. As a pipeline, PhyloSift incorporates several other programs including LAST, HMMER, and pplacer to automate phylogenetic analysis of protein coding and RNA sequences in metagenomic datasets generated by modern sequencing platforms (e.g., Illumina, 454).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 63 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 808 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 30 4%
Brazil 7 <1%
Canada 7 <1%
United Kingdom 6 <1%
Sweden 4 <1%
Germany 4 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
New Zealand 3 <1%
Belgium 2 <1%
Other 19 2%
Unknown 723 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 214 26%
Researcher 173 21%
Student > Master 113 14%
Student > Bachelor 62 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 43 5%
Other 118 15%
Unknown 85 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 376 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 135 17%
Environmental Science 57 7%
Computer Science 38 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 32 4%
Other 59 7%
Unknown 111 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 64. 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 April 2024.
All research outputs
#675,521
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from PeerJ
#671
of 15,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,812
of 320,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PeerJ
#4
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,300 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 320,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.