↓ Skip to main content

BLASTGrabber: a bioinformatic tool for visualization, analysis and sequence selection of massive BLAST data

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, January 2014
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
BLASTGrabber: a bioinformatic tool for visualization, analysis and sequence selection of massive BLAST data
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-15-128
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ralf Neumann, Surendra Kumar, Thomas Hendricus Haverkamp, Kamran Shalchian-Tabrizi

Abstract

Advances in sequencing efficiency have vastly increased the sizes of biological sequence databases, including many thousands of genome-sequenced species. The BLAST algorithm remains the main search engine for retrieving sequence information, and must consequently handle data on an unprecedented scale. This has been possible due to high-performance computers and parallel processing. However, the raw BLAST output from contemporary searches involving thousands of queries becomes ill-suited for direct human processing. Few programs attempt to directly visualize and interpret BLAST output; those that do often provide a mere basic structuring of BLAST data.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 3 2%
United States 2 2%
Germany 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 112 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 40 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 21%
Student > Master 16 12%
Student > Bachelor 14 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 7 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 70 54%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 15%
Computer Science 11 9%
Engineering 4 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 12 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 12 July 2015.
All research outputs
#1,795,219
of 14,573,111 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#737
of 5,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,589
of 190,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,573,111 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,420 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 190,105 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.