↓ Skip to main content

The origin of a derived superkingdom: how a gram-positive bacterium crossed the desert to become an archaeon

Overview of attention for article published in Biology Direct, February 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
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 origin of a derived superkingdom: how a gram-positive bacterium crossed the desert to become an archaeon
Published in
Biology Direct, February 2011
DOI 10.1186/1745-6150-6-16
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ruben E Valas, Philip E Bourne

Abstract

The tree of life is usually rooted between archaea and bacteria. We have previously presented three arguments that support placing the root of the tree of life in bacteria. The data have been dismissed because those who support the canonical rooting between the prokaryotic superkingdoms cannot imagine how the vast divide between the prokaryotic superkingdoms could be crossed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 5%
Germany 2 2%
Brazil 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
France 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 67 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 21%
Student > Master 11 14%
Professor 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 2 2%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 50 62%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 15%
Computer Science 2 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 9 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 24 August 2017.
All research outputs
#2,907,121
of 12,132,616 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#173
of 554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,013
of 97,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,132,616 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 97,730 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 64% of its contemporaries.