↓ Skip to main content

Production of Branched Tetraether Lipids in the Lower Pearl River and Estuary: Effects of Extraction Methods and Impact on bGDGT Proxies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Production of Branched Tetraether Lipids in the Lower Pearl River and Estuary: Effects of Extraction Methods and Impact on bGDGT Proxies
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2011.00274
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chuanlun L. Zhang, Jinxiang Wang, Yuli Wei, Chun Zhu, Liuqin Huang, Hailiang Dong

Abstract

Branched glycerol dibiphytanyl glycerol tetraethers (bGDGTs) are known as bacterial lipids that occur widely in terrestrial environments, particularly in anaerobic peat bogs and soil. We examined the abundance and distribution of bGDGTs in both core (C) and polar (P) lipid fractions from the water column and surface sediments in the lower Pearl River (PR) and its estuary using two extraction methods (sonication vs. Bligh and Dyer). A number of soil samples in the lower PR drainage basin were also collected and extracted for bGDGTs using the sonication method. The results showed aquatic production of bGDGTs as supported by substantial abundances of P-bGDGTs in the water column and sediment samples. The bGDGT-based proxies (BIT, CBT, and MBT) were not affected by the method of extraction when C-bGDGTs were analyzed; in such case, the pH(CBT) of the sediments reflected the soil pH of the lower PR drainage basin, and the temperature close to the annual mean air temperature (MAT) in the lower PR basin. On the other hand, the P-bGDGT-derived proxies were inconsistent between the two methods. The P-bGDGTs (particularly those extracted using the sonication method) may not be reliable indicators of annual MATs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 37 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 38%
Researcher 6 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 14 36%
Environmental Science 5 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Chemistry 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 9 23%
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 10 January 2012.
All research outputs
#20,165,369
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,060
of 24,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,176
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#229
of 318 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,472 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 318 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.