↓ Skip to main content

Spatial Structure and Activity of Sedimentary Microbial Communities Underlying a Beggiatoa spp. Mat in a Gulf of Mexico Hydrocarbon Seep

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
110 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
160 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
Spatial Structure and Activity of Sedimentary Microbial Communities Underlying a Beggiatoa spp. Mat in a Gulf of Mexico Hydrocarbon Seep
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2010
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0008738
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen G. Lloyd, Daniel B. Albert, Jennifer F. Biddle, Jeffrey P. Chanton, Oscar Pizarro, Andreas Teske

Abstract

Subsurface fluids from deep-sea hydrocarbon seeps undergo methane- and sulfur-cycling microbial transformations near the sediment surface. Hydrocarbon seep habitats are naturally patchy, with a mosaic of active seep sediments and non-seep sediments. Microbial community shifts and changing activity patterns on small spatial scales from seep to non-seep sediment remain to be examined in a comprehensive habitat study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 3%
Mexico 3 2%
Chile 2 1%
Germany 1 <1%
Saudi Arabia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 146 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 28%
Researcher 44 28%
Student > Master 20 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 11 7%
Other 6 4%
Other 18 11%
Unknown 17 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 64 40%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 27 17%
Environmental Science 21 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 2%
Other 11 7%
Unknown 23 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 February 2021.
All research outputs
#7,170,522
of 22,664,644 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#84,728
of 193,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,538
of 179,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#324
of 614 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,644 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 179,049 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 614 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.