↓ Skip to main content

PhyloExplorer: a web server to validate, explore and query phylogenetic trees

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, May 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
connotea
3 Connotea
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.
Article details
Title
PhyloExplorer: a web server to validate, explore and query phylogenetic trees
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, May 2009
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-9-108
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vincent Ranwez, Nicolas Clairon, Frédéric Delsuc, Saeed Pourali, Nicolas Auberval, Sorel Diser, Vincent Berry

Abstract

Many important problems in evolutionary biology require molecular phylogenies to be reconstructed. Phylogenetic trees must then be manipulated for subsequent inclusion in publications or analyses such as supertree inference and tree comparisons. However, no tool is currently available to facilitate the management of tree collections providing, for instance: standardisation of taxon names among trees with respect to a reference taxonomy; selection of relevant subsets of trees or sub-trees according to a taxonomic query; or simply computation of descriptive statistics on the collection. Moreover, although several databases of phylogenetic trees exist, there is currently no easy way to find trees that are both relevant and complementary to a given collection of trees.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 6 7%
Germany 4 4%
France 3 3%
Netherlands 2 2%
Uruguay 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Romania 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 71 77%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 29%
Professor > Associate Professor 15 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 15%
Professor 8 9%
Student > Master 5 5%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 7 8%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 59 64%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 8%
Computer Science 7 8%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 7%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 7 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 29 January 2015.
All research outputs
#6,103,283
of 34,427,821 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1,030
of 3,625 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,078
of 150,292 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#12
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,427,821 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,625 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 150,292 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.