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 |
Sequencing Intractable DNA to Close Microbial Genomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0041295 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Richard A. Hurt, Steven D. Brown, Mircea Podar, Anthony V. Palumbo, Dwayne A. Elias |
| Abstract |
Advancement in high throughput DNA sequencing technologies has supported a rapid proliferation of microbial genome sequencing projects, providing the genetic blueprint for in-depth studies. Oftentimes, difficult to sequence regions in microbial genomes are ruled "intractable" resulting in a growing number of genomes with sequence gaps deposited in databases. A procedure was developed to sequence such problematic regions in the "non-contiguous finished" Desulfovibrio desulfuricans ND132 genome (6 intractable gaps) and the Desulfovibrio africanus genome (1 intractable gap). The polynucleotides surrounding each gap formed GC rich secondary structures making the regions refractory to amplification and sequencing. Strand-displacing DNA polymerases used in concert with a novel ramped PCR extension cycle supported amplification and closure of all gap regions in both genomes. The developed procedures support accurate gene annotation, and provide a step-wise method that reduces the effort required for genome finishing. |
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 | 3 | 50% |
| Germany | 1 | 17% |
| Mexico | 1 | 17% |
| France | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 13% |
| Sweden | 1 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| Norway | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 17 | 74% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 35% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Professor | 3 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 3 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 65% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
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 30 November 2012.
All research outputs
#6,913,570
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#81,356
of 193,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,120
of 164,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,482
of 4,082 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,525 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 56% 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 164,116 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,082 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 61% of its contemporaries.