↓ Skip to main content

SLiCE: a novel bacterial cell extract-based DNA cloning method

Overview of attention for article published in Nucleic Acids Research, January 2012
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 (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 tweeters
patent
5 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
291 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
828 Mendeley
citeulike
4 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
SLiCE: a novel bacterial cell extract-based DNA cloning method
Published in
Nucleic Acids Research, January 2012
DOI 10.1093/nar/gkr1288
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yongwei Zhang, Uwe Werling, Winfried Edelmann

Abstract

We describe a novel cloning method termed SLiCE (Seamless Ligation Cloning Extract) that utilizes easy to generate bacterial cell extracts to assemble multiple DNA fragments into recombinant DNA molecules in a single in vitro recombination reaction. SLiCE overcomes the sequence limitations of traditional cloning methods, facilitates seamless cloning by recombining short end homologies (≥15 bp) with or without flanking heterologous sequences and provides an effective strategy for directional subcloning of DNA fragments from Bacteria Artificial Chromosomes (BACs) or other sources. SLiCE is highly cost effective as a number of standard laboratory bacterial strains can serve as sources for SLiCE extract. In addition, the cloning efficiencies and capabilities of these strains can be greatly improved by simple genetic modifications. As an example, we modified the DH10B Escherichia coli strain to express an optimized λ prophage Red recombination system. This strain, termed PPY, facilitates SLiCE with very high efficiencies and demonstrates the versatility of the method.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 828 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 12 1%
United Kingdom 6 <1%
Belgium 4 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
Japan 3 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Other 10 1%
Unknown 782 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 190 23%
Researcher 188 23%
Student > Master 123 15%
Student > Bachelor 121 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 35 4%
Other 111 13%
Unknown 60 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 412 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 233 28%
Immunology and Microbiology 22 3%
Chemistry 19 2%
Engineering 18 2%
Other 45 5%
Unknown 79 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 16 April 2020.
All research outputs
#637,204
of 15,923,161 outputs
Outputs from Nucleic Acids Research
#289
of 22,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,006
of 127,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nucleic Acids Research
#2
of 243 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,923,161 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,766 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 127,656 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 243 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 99% of its contemporaries.