↓ Skip to main content

Bridging the gap between systems biology and synthetic biology

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
166 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Bridging the gap between systems biology and synthetic biology
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2013.00211
Pubmed ID
Authors

Di Liu, Allison Hoynes-O’Connor, Fuzhong Zhang

Abstract

Systems biology is an inter-disciplinary science that studies the complex interactions and the collective behavior of a cell or an organism. Synthetic biology, as a technological subject, combines biological science and engineering, allowing the design and manipulation of a system for certain applications. Both systems and synthetic biology have played important roles in the recent development of microbial platforms for energy, materials, and environmental applications. More importantly, systems biology provides the knowledge necessary for the development of synthetic biology tools, which in turn facilitates the manipulation and understanding of complex biological systems. Thus, the combination of systems and synthetic biology has huge potential for studying and engineering microbes, especially to perform advanced tasks, such as producing biofuels. Although there have been very few studies in integrating systems and synthetic biology, existing examples have demonstrated great power in extending microbiological capabilities. This review focuses on recent efforts in microbiological genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics, aiming to fill the gap between systems and synthetic biology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
United Kingdom 3 2%
France 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Unknown 153 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 41 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 22%
Student > Master 24 14%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Other 10 6%
Other 24 14%
Unknown 14 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 37 22%
Engineering 9 5%
Chemical Engineering 6 4%
Computer Science 5 3%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 22 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 06 October 2022.
All research outputs
#4,288,966
of 23,485,296 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#4,354
of 25,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,940
of 284,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#66
of 406 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,485,296 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,930 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 284,688 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 406 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.