↓ Skip to main content

The Chado Natural Diversity module: a new generic database schema for large-scale phenotyping and genotyping data

Overview of attention for article published in Database: The Journal of Biological Databases & Curation, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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.
Article details
Title
The Chado Natural Diversity module: a new generic database schema for large-scale phenotyping and genotyping data
Published in
Database: The Journal of Biological Databases & Curation, November 2011
DOI 10.1093/database/bar051
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Linking phenotypic with genotypic diversity has become a major requirement for basic and applied genome-centric biological research. To meet this need, a comprehensive database backend for efficiently storing, querying and analyzing large experimental data sets is necessary. Chado, a generic, modular, community-based database schema is widely used in the biological community to store information associated with genome sequence data. To meet the need to also accommodate large-scale phenotyping and genotyping projects, a new Chado module called Natural Diversity has been developed. The module strictly adheres to the Chado remit of being generic and ontology driven. The flexibility of the new module is demonstrated in its capacity to store any type of experiment that either uses or generates specimens or stock organisms. Experiments may be grouped or structured hierarchically, whereas any kind of biological entity can be stored as the observed unit, from a specimen to be used in genotyping or phenotyping experiments, to a group of species collected in the field that will undergo further lab analysis. We describe details of the Natural Diversity module, including the design approach, the relational schema and use cases implemented in several databases.

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.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 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 %
Brazil 2 3%
United States 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Indonesia 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 68 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Student > Master 10 14%
Other 5 7%
Professor 5 7%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 43 58%
Computer Science 8 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 8%
Engineering 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 10 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 February 2012.
All research outputs
#23,294,844
of 34,358,242 outputs
Outputs from Database: The Journal of Biological Databases & Curation
#728
of 1,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,490
of 302,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Database: The Journal of Biological Databases & Curation
#10
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,358,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,191 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 302,117 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 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.