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 |
MetaGen: reference-free learning with multiple metagenomic samples
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-017-1323-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xin Xing, Jun S. Liu, Wenxuan Zhong |
| Abstract |
A major goal of metagenomics is to identify and study the entire collection of microbial species in a set of targeted samples. We describe a statistical metagenomic algorithm that simultaneously identifies microbial species and estimates their abundances without using reference genomes. As a trade-off, we require multiple metagenomic samples, usually ≥10 samples, to get highly accurate binning results. Compared to reference-free methods based primarily on k-mer distributions or coverage information, the proposed approach achieves a higher species binning accuracy and is particularly powerful when sequencing coverage is low. We demonstrated the performance of this new method through both simulation and real metagenomic studies. The MetaGen software is available at https://github.com/BioAlgs/MetaGen . |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 60 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 | 9 | 15% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 10% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 5% |
| Japan | 2 | 3% |
| Malaysia | 2 | 3% |
| France | 2 | 3% |
| Ecuador | 2 | 3% |
| India | 2 | 3% |
| Sweden | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 21 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 30 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 28 | 47% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 94 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 29% |
| Researcher | 21 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Professor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 29 | 31% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 21% |
| Computer Science | 15 | 16% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 5% |
| Mathematics | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#1,235,359
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#935
of 4,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,163
of 331,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#26
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,468 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 done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 331,602 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 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.