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 |
Genome-wide analysis of plant nat-siRNAs reveals insights into their distribution, biogenesis and function
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, March 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/gb-2012-13-3-r20 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiaoming Zhang, Jing Xia, Yifan E Lii, Blanca E Barrera-Figueroa, Xuefeng Zhou, Shang Gao, Lu Lu, Dongdong Niu, Zheng Chen, Christy Leung, Timothy Wong, Huiming Zhang, Jianhua Guo, Yi Li, Renyi Liu, Wanqi Liang, Jian-Kang Zhu, Weixiong Zhang, Hailing Jin |
| Abstract |
Many eukaryotic genomes encode cis-natural antisense transcripts (cis-NATs). Sense and antisense transcripts may form double-stranded RNAs that are processed by the RNA interference machinery into small interfering RNAs (siRNAs). A few so-called nat-siRNAs have been reported in plants, mammals, Drosophila, and yeasts. However, many questions remain regarding the features and biogenesis of nat-siRNAs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 States | 2 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| India | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 196 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 57 | 27% |
| Researcher | 53 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 29 | 14% |
| Unknown | 24 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 136 | 65% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 35 | 17% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | <1% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 2% |
| Unknown | 27 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 15 November 2020.
All research outputs
#5,446,210
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,945
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,778
of 172,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#26
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 172,651 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 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.