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 |
The Past, Present, and Future of Immune Repertoire Biology – The Rise of Next-Generation Repertoire Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in immunology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fimmu.2013.00413 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adrien Six, Maria Encarnita Mariotti-Ferrandiz, Wahiba Chaara, Susana Magadan, Hang-Phuong Pham, Marie-Paule Lefranc, Thierry Mora, Véronique Thomas-Vaslin, Aleksandra M. Walczak, Pierre Boudinot |
| Abstract |
T and B cell repertoires are collections of lymphocytes, each characterized by its antigen-specific receptor. We review here classical technologies and analysis strategies developed to assess immunoglobulin (IG) and T cell receptor (TR) repertoire diversity, and describe recent advances in the field. First, we describe the broad range of available methodological tools developed in the past decades, each of which answering different questions and showing complementarity for progressive identification of the level of repertoire alterations: global overview of the diversity by flow cytometry, IG repertoire descriptions at the protein level for the identification of IG reactivities, IG/TR CDR3 spectratyping strategies, and related molecular quantification or dynamics of T/B cell differentiation. Additionally, we introduce the recent technological advances in molecular biology tools allowing deeper analysis of IG/TR diversity by next-generation sequencing (NGS), offering systematic and comprehensive sequencing of IG/TR transcripts in a short amount of time. NGS provides several angles of analysis such as clonotype frequency, CDR3 diversity, CDR3 sequence analysis, V allele identification with a quantitative dimension, therefore requiring high-throughput analysis tools development. In this line, we discuss the recent efforts made for nomenclature standardization and ontology development. We then present the variety of available statistical analysis and modeling approaches developed with regards to the various levels of diversity analysis, and reveal the increasing sophistication of those modeling approaches. To conclude, we provide some examples of recent mathematical modeling strategies and perspectives that illustrate the active rise of a "next-generation" of repertoire analysis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 4 | 50% |
| United States | 3 | 38% |
| Unknown | 1 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 342 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 2% |
| Japan | 2 | <1% |
| China | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 327 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 91 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 65 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 36 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 6% |
| Other | 64 | 19% |
| Unknown | 43 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 98 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 72 | 21% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 41 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 11% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 10 | 3% |
| Other | 28 | 8% |
| Unknown | 54 | 16% |
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 14 April 2015.
All research outputs
#6,487,262
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#6,827
of 31,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,228
of 289,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#75
of 503 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 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 31,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 289,149 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 503 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.