| Title |
Performance comparison of second- and third-generation sequencers using a bacterial genome with two chromosomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Genomics, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2164-15-699 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mari Miyamoto, Daisuke Motooka, Kazuyoshi Gotoh, Takamasa Imai, Kazutoshi Yoshitake, Naohisa Goto, Tetsuya Iida, Teruo Yasunaga, Toshihiro Horii, Kazuharu Arakawa, Masahiro Kasahara, Shota Nakamura |
| Abstract |
The availability of diverse second- and third-generation sequencing technologies enables the rapid determination of the sequences of bacterial genomes. However, identifying the sequencing technology most suitable for producing a finished genome with multiple chromosomes remains a challenge. We evaluated the abilities of the following three second-generation sequencers: Roche 454 GS Junior (GS Jr), Life Technologies Ion PGM (Ion PGM), and Illumina MiSeq (MiSeq) and a third-generation sequencer, the Pacific Biosciences RS sequencer (PacBio), by sequencing and assembling the genome of Vibrio parahaemolyticus, which consists of a 5-Mb genome comprising two circular chromosomes. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 14 | 22% |
| United States | 14 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 8% |
| Germany | 2 | 3% |
| Canada | 2 | 3% |
| Norway | 1 | 2% |
| Comoros | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 20 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 34 | 54% |
| Scientists | 29 | 46% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 238 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Japan | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Slovenia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 3% |
| Unknown | 219 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 64 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 43 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 27 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 8% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 37 | 16% |
| Unknown | 35 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 107 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 41 | 17% |
| Computer Science | 12 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 21 | 9% |
| Unknown | 41 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 September 2015.
All research outputs
#1,158,038
of 25,706,302 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#163
of 11,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,384
of 248,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#3
of 264 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,706,302 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,305 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 248,295 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 264 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 98% of its contemporaries.