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 |
To Clone or Not To Clone: Method Analysis for Retrieving Consensus Sequences In Ancient DNA Samples
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, June 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0021247 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Misa Winters, Jodi Lynn Barta, Cara Monroe, Brian M. Kemp |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Iceland | 1 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Poland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 81 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 32% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 15% |
| Researcher | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 16% |
| Unknown | 5 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 47 | 54% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 18 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 8% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 9 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 28 June 2011.
All research outputs
#2,675,774
of 23,294,050 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#33,672
of 199,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,331
of 117,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#376
of 2,056 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,294,050 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 199,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 117,049 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,056 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.