↓ Skip to main content

Genome assembly forensics: finding the elusive mis-assembly

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology, March 2008
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
243 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
445 Mendeley
citeulike
23 CiteULike
connotea
2 Connotea
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
Genome assembly forensics: finding the elusive mis-assembly
Published in
Genome Biology, March 2008
DOI 10.1186/gb-2008-9-3-r55
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam M Phillippy, Michael C Schatz, Mihai Pop

Abstract

We present the first collection of tools aimed at automated genome assembly validation. This work formalizes several mechanisms for detecting mis-assemblies, and describes their implementation in our automated validation pipeline, called amosvalidate. We demonstrate the application of our pipeline in both bacterial and eukaryotic genome assemblies, and highlight several assembly errors in both draft and finished genomes. The software described is compatible with common assembly formats and is released, open-source, at http://amos.sourceforge.net.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 445 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 18 4%
United Kingdom 8 2%
Germany 5 1%
Brazil 5 1%
Switzerland 3 <1%
Norway 3 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Sweden 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Other 12 3%
Unknown 385 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 118 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 103 23%
Student > Master 63 14%
Other 28 6%
Student > Bachelor 27 6%
Other 74 17%
Unknown 32 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 264 59%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 65 15%
Computer Science 46 10%
Environmental Science 6 1%
Engineering 5 1%
Other 24 5%
Unknown 35 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 19 July 2021.
All research outputs
#2,432,066
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#1,972
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,845
of 95,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#3
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 95,242 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 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.