↓ Skip to main content

The Status, Quality, and Expansion of the NIH Full-Length cDNA Project: The Mammalian Gene Collection (MGC)

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Research, October 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 tweeters
patent
58 patents
wikipedia
3544 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
349 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
415 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
connotea
1 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
The Status, Quality, and Expansion of the NIH Full-Length cDNA Project: The Mammalian Gene Collection (MGC)
Published in
Genome Research, October 2004
DOI 10.1101/gr.2596504
Pubmed ID
Abstract

The National Institutes of Health's Mammalian Gene Collection (MGC) project was designed to generate and sequence a publicly accessible cDNA resource containing a complete open reading frame (ORF) for every human and mouse gene. The project initially used a random strategy to select clones from a large number of cDNA libraries from diverse tissues. Candidate clones were chosen based on 5'-EST sequences, and then fully sequenced to high accuracy and analyzed by algorithms developed for this project. Currently, more than 11,000 human and 10,000 mouse genes are represented in MGC by at least one clone with a full ORF. The random selection approach is now reaching a saturation point, and a transition to protocols targeted at the missing transcripts is now required to complete the mouse and human collections. Comparison of the sequence of the MGC clones to reference genome sequences reveals that most cDNA clones are of very high sequence quality, although it is likely that some cDNAs may carry missense variants as a consequence of experimental artifact, such as PCR, cloning, or reverse transcriptase errors. Recently, a rat cDNA component was added to the project, and ongoing frog (Xenopus) and zebrafish (Danio) cDNA projects were expanded to take advantage of the high-throughput MGC pipeline.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 415 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 12 3%
United States 6 1%
Germany 3 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Korea, Republic of 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 6 1%
Unknown 379 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 97 23%
Student > Bachelor 89 21%
Researcher 74 18%
Student > Master 50 12%
Unspecified 22 5%
Other 83 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 202 49%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 81 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 51 12%
Unspecified 27 7%
Chemistry 12 3%
Other 42 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 14 May 2018.
All research outputs
#449,819
of 11,891,627 outputs
Outputs from Genome Research
#329
of 3,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,523
of 269,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Research
#8
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,891,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 269,670 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.