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 |
High-Throughput Small-Molecule Screening in Caenorhabditis elegans.
|
|---|---|
| Chapter number | 11 |
| Book title |
Chemical Biology
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-2269-7_11 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-2268-0, 978-1-4939-2269-7
|
| Authors |
Sunitha Rangaraju, Gregory M Solis, Michael Petrascheck, Gregory M. Solis, Rangaraju, Sunitha, Solis, Gregory M., Petrascheck, Michael |
| Abstract |
Chemical compounds, which modulate enzymatic activities or those which induce specific phenotypes of interest, are valuable probes to study biological phenomena, as they allow modulation of enzymatic activities and temporal control of protein action. Here, we describe the methodology to conduct large-scale screens for chemical compounds that induce a desired phenotype in the roundworm Caenorhabditis elegans (C. elegans) using 96- or 384-well microtiter plates. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 50% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 30% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 10% |
| Engineering | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
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 23 September 2015.
All research outputs
#17,738,777
of 22,780,165 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#7,192
of 13,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,713
of 352,944 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#428
of 996 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,093 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 352,944 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 996 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 52% of its contemporaries.