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 |
Survey of commercial Rhodiola products revealed species diversity and potential safety issues
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep08337 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tianyi Xin, Xiaojin Li, Hui Yao, Yulin Lin, Xiaochong Ma, Ruiyang Cheng, Jingyuan Song, Lianghong Ni, Congzhao Fan, Shilin Chen |
| Abstract |
The adulteration of herbal products is a threat to consumer safety. Here we surveyed the species composition of commercial Rhodiola products using DNA barcoding as a supervisory method. A Rhodiola dietary supplement DNA barcode database was successfully constructed using 82 voucher samples from 10 Rhodiola species. Based on the DNA barcoding standard operating procedure (SOP), we used this database to identify 100 Rhodiolae Crenulatae Radix et Rhizoma decoction piece samples that were purchased from drug stores and hospitals. The results showed that only 36 decoction piece sequences (40%) were authentic R. crenulata, which is recorded in Chinese Pharmacopeia, whereas the other samples were all adulterants and may indicate a potential safety issue. Among the adulterants, 35 sequences (38.9%) were authenticated as R. serrata, nine sequences (10%) were authenticated as R. rosea, which is documented in the United States Pharmacopeia, and the remaining samples were authenticated as other three Rhodiola species. This result indicates decoction pieces that are available in the market have complex origins and DNA barcoding is a convenient tool for market supervision. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 2 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 53 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 19 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 21% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 21 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 03 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,833,509
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#16,771
of 124,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,212
of 356,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#166
of 1,319 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 124,252 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 356,741 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 1,319 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.