↓ Skip to main content

Evolutionary and Biomedical Insights from the Rhesus Macaque Genome

Overview of attention for article published in Science, April 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)


942 Dimensions

Readers on

641 Mendeley
17 CiteULike
8 Connotea
Evolutionary and Biomedical Insights from the Rhesus Macaque Genome
Published in
Science, April 2007
DOI 10.1126/science.1139247
Pubmed ID

R. A. Gibbs, J. Rogers, M. G. Katze, R. Bumgarner, G. M. Weinstock, E. R. Mardis, K. A. Remington, R. L. Strausberg, J. C. Venter, R. K. Wilson, M. A. Batzer, C. D. Bustamante, E. E. Eichler, M. W. Hahn, R. C. Hardison, K. D. Makova, W. Miller, A. Milosavljevic, R. E. Palermo, A. Siepel, J. M. Sikela, T. Attaway, S. Bell, K. E. Bernard, C. J. Buhay, M. N. Chandrabose, M. Dao, C. Davis, K. D. Delehaunty, Y. Ding, H. H. Dinh, S. Dugan-Rocha, L. A. Fulton, R. A. Gabisi, T. T. Garner, J. Godfrey, A. C. Hawes, J. Hernandez, S. Hines, M. Holder, J. Hume, S. N. Jhangiani, V. Joshi, Z. M. Khan, E. F. Kirkness, A. Cree, R. G. Fowler, S. Lee, L. R. Lewis, Z. Li, Y.-s. Liu, S. M. Moore, D. Muzny, L. V. Nazareth, D. N. Ngo, G. O. Okwuonu, G. Pai, D. Parker, H. A. Paul, C. Pfannkoch, C. S. Pohl, Y.-H. Rogers, S. J. Ruiz, A. Sabo, J. Santibanez, B. W. Schneider, S. M. Smith, E. Sodergren, A. F. Svatek, T. R. Utterback, S. Vattathil, W. Warren, C. S. White, A. T. Chinwalla, Y. Feng, A. L. Halpern, L. W. Hillier, X. Huang, P. Minx, J. O. Nelson, K. H. Pepin, X. Qin, G. G. Sutton, E. Venter, B. P. Walenz, J. W. Wallis, K. C. Worley, S.-P. Yang, S. M. Jones, M. A. Marra, M. Rocchi, J. E. Schein, R. Baertsch, L. Clarke, M. Csuros, J. Glasscock, R. A. Harris, P. Havlak, A. R. Jackson, H. Jiang, Y. Liu, D. N. Messina, Y. Shen, H. X.-Z. Song, T. Wylie, L. Zhang, E. Birney, K. Han, M. K. Konkel, J. Lee, A. F. A. Smit, B. Ullmer, H. Wang, J. Xing, R. Burhans, Z. Cheng, J. E. Karro, J. Ma, B. Raney, X. She, M. J. Cox, J. P. Demuth, L. J. Dumas, S.-G. Han, J. Hopkins, A. Karimpour-Fard, Y. H. Kim, J. R. Pollack, T. Vinar, C. Addo-Quaye, J. Degenhardt, A. Denby, M. J. Hubisz, A. Indap, C. Kosiol, B. T. Lahn, H. A. Lawson, A. Marklein, R. Nielsen, E. J. Vallender, A. G. Clark, B. Ferguson, R. D. Hernandez, K. Hirani, H. Kehrer-Sawatzki, J. Kolb, S. Patil, L.-L. Pu, Y. Ren, D. G. Smith, D. A. Wheeler, I. Schenck, E. V. Ball, R. Chen, D. N. Cooper, B. Giardine, F. Hsu, W. J. Kent, A. Lesk, D. L. Nelson, W. E. O'Brien, K. Prufer, P. D. Stenson, J. C. Wallace, H. Ke, X.-M. Liu, P. Wang, A. P. Xiang, F. Yang, G. P. Barber, D. Haussler, D. Karolchik, A. D. Kern, R. M. Kuhn, K. E. Smith, A. S. Zwieg


The rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) is an abundant primate species that diverged from the ancestors of Homo sapiens about 25 million years ago. Because they are genetically and physiologically similar to humans, rhesus monkeys are the most widely used nonhuman primate in basic and applied biomedical research. We determined the genome sequence of an Indian-origin Macaca mulatta female and compared the data with chimpanzees and humans to reveal the structure of ancestral primate genomes and to identify evidence for positive selection and lineage-specific expansions and contractions of gene families. A comparison of sequences from individual animals was used to investigate their underlying genetic diversity. The complete description of the macaque genome blueprint enhances the utility of this animal model for biomedical research and improves our understanding of the basic biology of the species.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 641 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 32 5%
Germany 9 1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Spain 4 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
China 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Other 12 2%
Unknown 571 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 180 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 148 23%
Student > Master 59 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 59 9%
Professor 52 8%
Other 119 19%
Unknown 24 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 379 59%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 105 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 5%
Neuroscience 16 2%
Computer Science 15 2%
Other 56 9%
Unknown 41 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
of 14,560,090 outputs
Outputs from Science
of 64,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 13,730,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
of 64,563 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,560,090 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 64,658 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 47.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 13,730,483 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64,563 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.