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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Current and future editing reagent delivery systems for plant genome editing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science China Life Sciences, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11427-017-9022-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yidong Ran, Zhen Liang, Caixia Gao |
| Abstract |
Many genome editing tools have been developed and new ones are anticipated; some have been extensively applied in plant genetics, biotechnology and breeding, especially the CRISPR/Cas9 system. These technologies have opened up a new era for crop improvement due to their precise editing of user-specified sequences related to agronomic traits. In this review, we will focus on an update of recent developments in the methodologies of editing reagent delivery, and consider the pros and cons of current delivery systems. Finally, we will reflect on possible future directions. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 186 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 32 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 26 | 14% |
| Unknown | 52 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 74 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 42 | 22% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 2% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 2% |
| Unknown | 59 | 32% |
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 27 March 2018.
All research outputs
#17,893,544
of 22,973,051 outputs
Outputs from Science China Life Sciences
#563
of 1,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,838
of 310,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science China Life Sciences
#14
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,973,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,009 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 310,772 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.