↓ Skip to main content

Metabolomics study of Populus type propolis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pharmaceutical & Biomedical Analysis, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Metabolomics study of Populus type propolis
Published in
Journal of Pharmaceutical & Biomedical Analysis, February 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jpba.2016.12.003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Boban Anđelković, Ljubodrag Vujisić, Ivan Vučković, Vele Tešević, Vlatka Vajs, Dejan Gođevac

Abstract

Herein, we propose rapid and simple spectroscopic methods to determine the chemical composition of propolis derived from various Populus species using a metabolomics approach. In order to correlate variability in Populus type propolis composition with the altitude of its collection, NMR, IR, and UV spectroscopy followed by OPLS was conducted. The botanical origin of propolis was established by comparing propolis spectral data to those of buds of various Populus species. An O2PLS method was utilized to integrate two blocks of data. According to OPLS and O2PLS, the major compounds in propolis samples, collected from temperate continental climate above 500m, were phenolic glycerides originating from P. tremula buds. Flavonoids were predominant in propolis samples collected below 400m, originating from P. nigra and P. x euramericana buds. Samples collected at 400-500m were of mixed origin, with variable amounts of all detected metabolites.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 12 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 19%
Chemistry 10 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 8%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 18 34%

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 01 August 2017.
All research outputs
#9,792,805
of 12,257,326 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pharmaceutical & Biomedical Analysis
#1,481
of 2,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,067
of 268,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pharmaceutical & Biomedical Analysis
#29
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,257,326 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,201 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 268,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.