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 |
Recent Advances in CRISPR-Cas Technologies for Synthetic Biology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Microbiology, February 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12275-022-00005-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Song Hee Jeong, Ho Joung Lee, Sang Jun Lee |
| Abstract |
With developments in synthetic biology, "engineering biology" has emerged through standardization and platformization based on hierarchical, orthogonal, and modularized biological systems. Genome engineering is necessary to manufacture and design synthetic cells with desired functions by using bioparts obtained from sequence databases. Among various tools, the CRISPR-Cas system is modularly composed of guide RNA and Cas nuclease; therefore, it is convenient for editing the genome freely. Recently, various strategies have been developed to accurately edit the genome at a single nucleotide level. Furthermore, CRISPR-Cas technology has been extended to molecular diagnostics for nucleic acids and detection of pathogens, including disease-causing viruses. Moreover, CRISPR technology, which can precisely control the expression of specific genes in cells, is evolving to find the target of metabolic biotechnology. In this review, we summarize the status of various CRISPR technologies that can be applied to synthetic biology and discuss the development of synthetic biology combined with CRISPR technology in microbiology. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ecuador | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 89% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 19% |
| Researcher | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 3% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 16 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 17 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 December 2023.
All research outputs
#2,478,007
of 25,037,495 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Microbiology
#26
of 862 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,306
of 465,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Microbiology
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,037,495 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 862 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 465,800 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 93% of its contemporaries.