↓ Skip to main content

Formation temperatures of thermogenic and biogenic methane

Overview of attention for article published in Science, June 2014
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
twitter
8 tweeters
patent
18 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
171 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
291 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
Formation temperatures of thermogenic and biogenic methane
Published in
Science, June 2014
DOI 10.1126/science.1254509
Pubmed ID
Authors

D. A. Stolper, M. Lawson, C. L. Davis, A. A. Ferreira, E. V. Santos Neto, G. S. Ellis, M. D. Lewan, A. M. Martini, Y. Tang, M. Schoell, A. L. Sessions, J. M. Eiler

Abstract

Methane is an important greenhouse gas and energy resource generated dominantly by methanogens at low temperatures and through the breakdown of organic molecules at high temperatures. However, methane-formation temperatures in nature are often poorly constrained. We measured formation temperatures of thermogenic and biogenic methane using a "clumped isotope" technique. Thermogenic gases yield formation temperatures between 157° and 221°C, within the nominal gas window, and biogenic gases yield formation temperatures consistent with their comparatively lower-temperature formational environments (<50°C). In systems where gases have migrated and other proxies for gas-generation temperature yield ambiguous results, methane clumped-isotope temperatures distinguish among and allow for independent tests of possible gas-formation models.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 291 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 2%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Unknown 280 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 21%
Researcher 56 19%
Student > Master 49 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 7%
Student > Bachelor 19 7%
Other 51 18%
Unknown 35 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 129 44%
Environmental Science 37 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 8%
Chemistry 14 5%
Engineering 10 3%
Other 19 7%
Unknown 59 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 68. 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 February 2022.
All research outputs
#492,006
of 21,685,809 outputs
Outputs from Science
#12,000
of 76,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,852
of 202,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#162
of 884 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,685,809 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 76,802 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 60.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 202,695 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 884 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.