↓ Skip to main content

Versatile and open software for comparing large genomes

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology, January 2004
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users
patent
14 patents
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
4660 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2252 Mendeley
citeulike
23 CiteULike
connotea
3 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
Versatile and open software for comparing large genomes
Published in
Genome Biology, January 2004
DOI 10.1186/gb-2004-5-2-r12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefan Kurtz, Adam Phillippy, Arthur L Delcher, Michael Smoot, Martin Shumway, Corina Antonescu, Steven L Salzberg

Abstract

The newest version of MUMmer easily handles comparisons of large eukaryotic genomes at varying evolutionary distances, as demonstrated by applications to multiple genomes. Two new graphical viewing tools provide alternative ways to analyze genome alignments. The new system is the first version of MUMmer to be released as open-source software. This allows other developers to contribute to the code base and freely redistribute the code. The MUMmer sources are available at http://www.tigr.org/software/mummer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 2,252 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 40 2%
United Kingdom 13 <1%
Germany 10 <1%
Brazil 10 <1%
Mexico 9 <1%
France 7 <1%
Spain 7 <1%
Australia 7 <1%
Denmark 6 <1%
Other 55 2%
Unknown 2088 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 590 26%
Researcher 490 22%
Student > Master 298 13%
Student > Bachelor 173 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 108 5%
Other 324 14%
Unknown 269 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1063 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 454 20%
Computer Science 144 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 67 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 46 2%
Other 143 6%
Unknown 335 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 25 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,503,504
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#1,198
of 4,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,806
of 150,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#1
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 150,648 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 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.