↓ Skip to main content

Carbonate Precipitation through Microbial Activities in Natural Environment, and Their Potential in Biotechnology: A Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
453 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
656 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
Carbonate Precipitation through Microbial Activities in Natural Environment, and Their Potential in Biotechnology: A Review
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2016.00004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tingting Zhu, Maria Dittrich

Abstract

Calcium carbonate represents a large portion of carbon reservoir and is used commercially for a variety of applications. Microbial carbonate precipitation, a by-product of microbial activities, plays an important metal coprecipitation and cementation role in natural systems. This natural process occurring in various geological settings can be mimicked and used for a number of biotechnologies, such as metal remediation, carbon sequestration, enhanced oil recovery, and construction restoration. In this study, different metabolic activities leading to calcium carbonate precipitation, their native environment, and potential applications and challenges are reviewed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 656 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Ukraine 1 <1%
Unknown 652 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 107 16%
Researcher 95 14%
Student > Master 83 13%
Student > Bachelor 68 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 30 5%
Other 69 11%
Unknown 204 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 120 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 65 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 56 9%
Environmental Science 54 8%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 50 8%
Other 80 12%
Unknown 231 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 May 2021.
All research outputs
#5,727,856
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#803
of 6,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,479
of 394,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#6
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,565 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 394,766 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 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.