↓ Skip to main content

Bacteria–Bacteriophage Coevolution in the Human Gut: Implications for Microbial Diversity and Functionality

Overview of attention for article published in Trends in Microbiology, August 2017
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
236 Mendeley
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.
Title
Bacteria–Bacteriophage Coevolution in the Human Gut: Implications for Microbial Diversity and Functionality
Published in
Trends in Microbiology, August 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.tim.2017.02.012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pauline D. Scanlan

Abstract

Antagonistic coevolution (AC) between bacteria and bacteriophages plays a key role in driving and maintaining microbial diversity. Consequently, AC is predicted to affect all levels of biological organisation, from the individual to ecosystem scales. Nonetheless, we know nothing about bacteria-bacteriophage AC in perhaps the most important and clinically relevant microbial ecosystem known to humankind - the human gut microbiome. In this opinion piece I review current research on bacteria-phage AC in in vitro and natural populations of microbes. I then examine the evidence and discuss the potential role of AC in driving observed patterns of intra- and interindividual variation in the gut microbiome together with detailing the potential functional consequences of such AC-driven microbial variation for human health and disease.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 65 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 236 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 234 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 58 25%
Researcher 57 24%
Student > Master 29 12%
Student > Bachelor 23 10%
Other 11 5%
Other 34 14%
Unknown 24 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 70 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 62 26%
Immunology and Microbiology 36 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 3%
Engineering 6 3%
Other 17 7%
Unknown 37 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 60. 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 11 June 2019.
All research outputs
#454,634
of 18,229,994 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Microbiology
#64
of 1,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,824
of 275,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Microbiology
#3
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,229,994 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 1,946 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 275,466 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.