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 |
Agalma: an automated phylogenomics workflow
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-14-330 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Casey W Dunn, Mark Howison, Felipe Zapata |
| Abstract |
In the past decade, transcriptome data have become an important component of many phylogenetic studies. They are a cost-effective source of protein-coding gene sequences, and have helped projects grow from a few genes to hundreds or thousands of genes. Phylogenetic studies now regularly include genes from newly sequenced transcriptomes, as well as publicly available transcriptomes and genomes. Implementing such a phylogenomic study, however, is computationally intensive, requires the coordinated use of many complex software tools, and includes multiple steps for which no published tools exist. Phylogenomic studies have therefore been manual or semiautomated. In addition to taking considerable user time, this makes phylogenomic analyses difficult to reproduce, compare, and extend. In addition, methodological improvements made in the context of one study often cannot be easily applied and evaluated in the context of other studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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 | 8 | 24% |
| Colombia | 2 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Montenegro | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 52% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 52% |
| Scientists | 16 | 48% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 230 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 4 | 2% |
| Brazil | 4 | 2% |
| United States | 4 | 2% |
| Spain | 3 | 1% |
| Norway | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 2% |
| Unknown | 202 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 67 | 29% |
| Researcher | 66 | 29% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 33 | 14% |
| Unknown | 17 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 136 | 59% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 39 | 17% |
| Computer Science | 17 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 2% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 11 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 23 June 2019.
All research outputs
#1,200,344
of 23,173,635 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#157
of 7,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,963
of 304,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#6
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,173,635 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,343 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 304,184 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 102 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 95% of its contemporaries.