↓ Skip to main content

Utilizing pyrosequencing and quantitative PCR to characterize fungal populations among house dust samples

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Environmental Monitoring, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
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
Utilizing pyrosequencing and quantitative PCR to characterize fungal populations among house dust samples
Published in
Journal of Environmental Monitoring, July 2012
DOI 10.1039/c2em30229b
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Molecular techniques are an alternative to culturing and counting methods in quantifying indoor fungal contamination. Pyrosequencing offers the possibility of identifying unexpected indoor fungi. In this study, 50 house dust samples were collected from homes in the Yakima Valley, WA. Each sample was analyzed by quantitative PCR (QPCR) for 36 common fungi and by fungal tag-encoded flexible (FLX) amplicon pyrosequencing (fTEFAP) for these and additional fungi. Only 24 of the samples yielded amplified results using fTEFAP but QPCR successfully amplified all 50 samples. Over 450 fungal species were detected by fTEFAP but most were rare. Twenty-two fungi were found by fTEFAP to occur with at least an average of ≥0.5% relative occurrence. Many of these fungi seem to be associated with plants, soil or human skin. Combining fTEFAP and QPCR can enhance studies of fungal contamination in homes.

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 65 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 %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 25%
Researcher 14 22%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Student > Master 4 6%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 15%
Environmental Science 8 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 14 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 August 2012.
All research outputs
#19,155,287
of 27,776,330 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Environmental Monitoring
#90
of 90 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,757
of 183,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Environmental Monitoring
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,776,330 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 90 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 183,270 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 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.