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
| Chapter title |
In Situ Hybridization for Fungal Ribosomal RNA Sequences in Paraffin-Embedded Tissues Using Biotin-Labeled Locked Nucleic Acid Probes
|
|---|---|
| Chapter number | 18 |
| Book title |
In Situ Hybridization Protocols
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-1459-3_18 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-1458-6, 978-1-4939-1459-3
|
| Authors |
Kathleen T. Montone, Montone, Kathleen T. |
| Abstract |
Ribosomal RNAs (rRNA) are conserved, abundant species-specific sequences that are used for phylogenetically classifying organisms. Due to their abundance and species specificity, rRNA sequences have been established as optimal targets for in situ hybridization (ISH). ISH for rRNA sequences using DNA oligonucleotide probes has been utilized to detect a variety of fungi in paraffin tissues. However, ISH with some oligonucleotide DNA probes produces weak signals, and applications for nucleotide modification may be useful to enhance hybridization signal. ISH with LNA probes has been shown to result in improved ISH signal. A protocol for LNA ISH with biotin-labeled LNA oligonucleotide probes is described. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 6 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 33% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 17% |
| Other | 1 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 17% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 33% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 17% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 June 2015.
All research outputs
#18,379,018
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#7,871
of 13,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,421
of 305,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#294
of 597 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,089 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 305,303 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 597 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.