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.
Timeline
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
Title |
HPLC fucoxanthin profiles of a microalga, a macroalga and a pure fucoxanthin standard
|
---|---|
Published in |
Data in Brief, December 2016
|
DOI | 10.1016/j.dib.2016.12.047 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Su Chern Foo, Fatimah Md Yusoff, Maznah Ismail, Mahiran Basri, Sook Kun Yau, Nicholas M H Khong, Kim Wei Chan, Mahdi Ebrahimi |
Abstract |
Data in this article illustrate representative fucoxanthin chromatograms of a microalga, Chaetoceros calcitrans; a macroalga, Saccharina japonica and; a pure fucoxanthin standard. High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) eluted fucoxanthin at the 7.008±0.024th min. This data article refers to the research article ''Antioxidant capacities of fucoxanthin-producing algae as influenced by their carotenoid and phenolic contents'' Foo et al. [1]; where a more comprehensive data interpretation and analysis is explained. |
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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Mexico | 1 | 50% |
Germany | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 13 | 21% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 13% |
Researcher | 7 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 8% |
Other | 12 | 20% |
Unknown | 11 | 18% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 33% |
Chemistry | 6 | 10% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 10% |
Chemical Engineering | 4 | 7% |
Environmental Science | 3 | 5% |
Other | 7 | 11% |
Unknown | 15 | 25% |
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 09 March 2017.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Data in Brief
#2,355
of 3,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#320,411
of 422,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Data in Brief
#33
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 3,678 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 422,405 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.