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 |
Metagenomic Data Utilization and Analysis (MEDUSA) and Construction of a Global Gut Microbial Gene Catalogue
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Computational Biology, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003706 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fredrik H. Karlsson, Intawat Nookaew, Jens Nielsen |
| Abstract |
Metagenomic sequencing has contributed important new knowledge about the microbes that live in a symbiotic relationship with humans. With modern sequencing technology it is possible to generate large numbers of sequencing reads from a metagenome but analysis of the data is challenging. Here we present the bioinformatics pipeline MEDUSA that facilitates analysis of metagenomic reads at the gene and taxonomic level. We also constructed a global human gut microbial gene catalogue by combining data from 4 studies spanning 3 continents. Using MEDUSA we mapped 782 gut metagenomes to the global gene catalogue and a catalogue of sequenced microbial species. Hereby we find that all studies share about half a million genes and that on average 300,000 genes are shared by half the studied subjects. The gene richness is higher in the European studies compared to Chinese and American and this is also reflected in the species richness. Even though it is possible to identify common species and a core set of genes, we find that there are large variations in abundance of species and genes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 6 | 67% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Sweden | 1 | 11% |
| Norway | 1 | 11% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 56% |
| Scientists | 4 | 44% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 4% |
| Belgium | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Hungary | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 178 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 51 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 47 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 7% |
| Other | 23 | 12% |
| Unknown | 23 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 80 | 41% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 36 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 5% |
| Engineering | 7 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 31 | 16% |
| Unknown | 28 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 06 August 2021.
All research outputs
#1,869,639
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#1,645
of 8,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,279
of 240,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#23
of 156 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 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 8,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 240,631 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 156 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.