↓ Skip to main content

Microbial genomic taxonomy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
27 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
120 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
182 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
Microbial genomic taxonomy
Published in
BMC Genomics, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-14-913
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cristiane C Thompson, Luciane Chimetto, Robert A Edwards, Jean Swings, Erko Stackebrandt, Fabiano L Thompson

Abstract

A need for a genomic species definition is emerging from several independent studies worldwide. In this commentary paper, we discuss recent studies on the genomic taxonomy of diverse microbial groups and a unified species definition based on genomics. Accordingly, strains from the same microbial species share >95% Average Amino Acid Identity (AAI) and Average Nucleotide Identity (ANI), >95% identity based on multiple alignment genes, <10 in Karlin genomic signature, and > 70% in silico Genome-to-Genome Hybridization similarity (GGDH). Species of the same genus will form monophyletic groups on the basis of 16S rRNA gene sequences, Multilocus Sequence Analysis (MLSA) and supertree analysis. In addition to the established requirements for species descriptions, we propose that new taxa descriptions should also include at least a draft genome sequence of the type strain in order to obtain a clear outlook on the genomic landscape of the novel microbe. The application of the new genomic species definition put forward here will allow researchers to use genome sequences to define simultaneously coherent phenotypic and genomic groups.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 182 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
Belgium 3 2%
Brazil 2 1%
Sweden 2 1%
Australia 2 1%
Mexico 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 162 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 39 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 21%
Student > Master 27 15%
Student > Bachelor 21 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 9%
Other 33 18%
Unknown 7 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 94 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 31 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 7%
Environmental Science 10 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 3%
Other 15 8%
Unknown 14 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 08 September 2014.
All research outputs
#948,067
of 12,373,620 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#394
of 7,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,246
of 225,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#52
of 874 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,620 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,313 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 225,461 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 874 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.