↓ Skip to main content

Fluorescent Reporter Libraries as Useful Tools for Optimizing Microbial Cell Factories: A Review of the Current Methods and Applications

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Fluorescent Reporter Libraries as Useful Tools for Optimizing Microbial Cell Factories: A Review of the Current Methods and Applications
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2015.00147
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frank Delvigne, Hélène Pêcheux, Cédric Tarayre

Abstract

The use of genetically encoded fluorescent reporters allows speeding up the initial optimization steps of microbial bioprocesses. These reporters can be used for determining the expression level of a particular promoter, not only the synthesis of a specific protein but also the content of intracellular metabolites. The level of protein/metabolite is thus proportional to a fluorescence signal. By this way, mean expression profiles of protein/metabolites can be determined non-invasively at a high-throughput rate, allowing the rapid identification of the best producers. Actually, different kinds of reporter systems are available, as well as specific cultivation devices allowing the on-line recording of the fluorescent signal. Cell-to-cell variability is another important phenomenon that can be integrated into the screening procedures for the selection of more efficient microbial cell factories.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 73 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 24%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 13%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 15 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 21%
Engineering 7 9%
Chemical Engineering 5 7%
Chemistry 2 3%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 21 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,774,112
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#2,891
of 6,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,736
of 274,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#39
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,561 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 274,283 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.