↓ Skip to main content

Enzymatically Generated CRISPR Libraries for Genome Labeling and Screening

Overview of attention for article published in Developmental Cell, July 2015
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
33 tweeters
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
210 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Enzymatically Generated CRISPR Libraries for Genome Labeling and Screening
Published in
Developmental Cell, July 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.devcel.2015.06.003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lane, Andrew B, Strzelecka, Magdalena, Ettinger, Andreas, Grenfell, Andrew W, Wittmann, Torsten, Heald, Rebecca, Andrew B. Lane, Magdalena Strzelecka, Andreas Ettinger, Andrew W. Grenfell, Torsten Wittmann, Rebecca Heald

Abstract

CRISPR-based technologies have emerged as powerful tools to alter genomes and mark chromosomal loci, but an inexpensive method for generating large numbers of RNA guides for whole genome screening and labeling is lacking. Using a method that permits library construction from any source of DNA, we generated guide libraries that label repetitive loci or a single chromosomal locus in Xenopus egg extracts and show that a complex library can target the E. coli genome at high frequency.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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 210 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 9 4%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 193 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 68 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 54 26%
Student > Master 21 10%
Student > Bachelor 14 7%
Student > Postgraduate 11 5%
Other 42 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 115 55%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 53 25%
Unspecified 11 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 1%
Other 19 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 18 May 2017.
All research outputs
#298,873
of 11,460,807 outputs
Outputs from Developmental Cell
#147
of 2,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,019
of 235,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Developmental Cell
#3
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,460,807 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,727 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 235,206 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.