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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Meeting Report: 1st International Functional Metagenomics Workshop May 7–8, 2012, St. Jacobs, Ontario, Canada.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Microbiome, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.4056/sigs.3406845 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katja Engel, Deborah Ashby, Sean F. Brady, Don A. Cowan, John Doemer, Elizabeth A. Edwards, Klaus Fiebig, Eric C. Martens, Dennis McCormac, David A. Mead, Kentaro Miyazaki, Gabriel Moreno-Hagelsieb, Fergal O’Gara, Alexandra Reid, David R. Rose, Pascal Simonet, Sara Sjöling, Kornelia Smalla, Wolfgang R. Streit, Jennifer Tedman-Jones, Svein Valla, Elizabeth M. H. Wellington, Cheng-Cang Wu, Mark R. Liles, Josh D. Neufeld, Angela Sessitsch, Trevor C. Charles |
| Abstract |
This report summarizes the events of the 1(st) International Functional Metagenomics Workshop. The workshop was held on May 7 and 8, 2012, in St. Jacobs, Ontario, Canada and was focused on building an international functional metagenomics community, exploring strategic research areas, and identifying opportunities for future collaboration and funding. The workshop was initiated by researchers at the University of Waterloo with support from the Ontario Genomics Institute (OGI), Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and the University of Waterloo. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 10% |
| United States | 2 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 24 | 77% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 23% |
| Professor | 5 | 16% |
| Researcher | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 16% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 55% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 23% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 10% |
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 21 August 2013.
All research outputs
#19,709,479
of 24,223,370 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Microbiome
#366
of 559 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,064
of 200,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Microbiome
#11
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,223,370 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 559 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. 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 200,500 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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.