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 |
Comparison of different protocols for the extraction of microbial DNA from reef corals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1590/s1517-83822012000200012 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
H.F. Santos, F.L. Carmo, D.C.A. Leite, H.E. Jesus, P. De Carvalho Maalouf, C. Almeida, A.U. Soriano, D. Altomari, L. Suhett, V. Vólaro, E. Valoni, M. Francisco, J. Vieira, R. Rocha, B.L. Sardinha, L.B. Mendes, R.R. João, B. Lacava, R.F. Jesus, G.V. Sebastian, A. Pessoa, J.D. van Elsas, R.P. Rezende, D.O. Pires, G. Duarte, C.B. Castro, A.S. Rosado, R.S. Peixoto |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to test different protocols for the extraction of microbial DNA from the coral Mussismilia harttii. Four different commercial kits were tested, three of them based on methods for DNA extraction from soil (FastDNA SPIN Kit for soil, MP Bio, PowerSoil DNA Isolation Kit, MoBio, and ZR Soil Microbe DNA Kit, Zymo Research) and one kit for DNA extraction from plants (UltraClean Plant DNA Isolation Kit, MoBio). Five polyps of the same colony of M. harttii were macerated and aliquots were submitted to DNA extraction by the different kits. After extraction, the DNA was quantified and PCR-DGGE was used to study the molecular fingerprint of Bacteria and Eukarya. Among the four kits tested, the ZR Soil Microbe DNA Kit was the most efficient with respect to the amount of DNA extracted, yielding about three times more DNA than the other kits. Also, we observed a higher number and intensities of DGGE bands for both Bacteria and Eukarya with the same kit. Considering these results, we suggested that the ZR Soil Microbe DNA Kit is the best adapted for the study of the microbial communities of corals. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 87 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 14% |
| Researcher | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 10 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 39 | 43% |
| Environmental Science | 11 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 12% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 18 | 20% |
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 01 August 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#593
of 1,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,258
of 179,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#14
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 1,377 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 179,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.