↓ Skip to main content

Novel SNP Discovery in African Buffalo, Syncerus caffer, Using High-Throughput Sequencing

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 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
Novel SNP Discovery in African Buffalo, Syncerus caffer, Using High-Throughput Sequencing
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0048792
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nikki le Roex, Harry Noyes, Andrew Brass, Daniel G. Bradley, Steven J. Kemp, Suzanne Kay, Paul D. van Helden, Eileen G. Hoal

Abstract

The African buffalo, Syncerus caffer, is one of the most abundant and ecologically important species of megafauna in the savannah ecosystem. It is an important prey species, as well as a host for a vast array of nematodes, pathogens and infectious diseases, such as bovine tuberculosis and corridor disease. Large-scale SNP discovery in this species would greatly facilitate further research into the area of host genetics and disease susceptibility, as well as provide a wealth of sequence information for other conservation and genomics studies. We sequenced pools of Cape buffalo DNA from a total of 9 animals, on an ABI SOLiD4 sequencer. The resulting short reads were mapped to the UMD3.1 Bos taurus genome assembly using both BWA and Bowtie software packages. A mean depth of 2.7× coverage over the mapped regions was obtained. Btau4 gene annotation was added to all SNPs identified within gene regions. Bowtie and BWA identified a maximum of 2,222,665 and 276,847 SNPs within the buffalo respectively, depending on analysis method. A panel of 173 SNPs was validated by fluorescent genotyping in 87 individuals. 27 SNPs failed to amplify, and of the remaining 146 SNPs, 43-54% of the Bowtie SNPs and 57-58% of the BWA SNPs were confirmed as polymorphic. dN/dS ratios found no evidence of positive selection, and although there were genes that appeared to be under negative selection, these were more likely to be slowly evolving house-keeping genes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Switzerland 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 85 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 20%
Student > Postgraduate 10 11%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 21 24%
Unknown 7 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 52 58%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 4%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 8 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 July 2014.
All research outputs
#14,198,017
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#116,144
of 194,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,048
of 183,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,600
of 4,904 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,194 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 183,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,904 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.