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 |
Application of calcifying bacteria for remediation of stones and cultural heritages
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00304 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Navdeep Kaur Dhami, M. Sudhakara Reddy, Abhijit Mukherjee |
| Abstract |
Since ages, architects and artists worldwide have focused on usage of durable stones as marble and limestone for construction of beautiful and magnificent historic monuments as European Cathedrals, Roman, and Greek temples, Taj Mahal etc. But survival of these irreplaceable cultural and historical assets is in question these days due to their degradation and deterioration caused by number of biotic and abiotic factors. These causative agents have affected not only the esthetic appearance of these structures, but also lead to deterioration of their strength and durability. The present review emphasizes about different causative agents leading to deterioration and application of microbially induced calcium carbonate precipitation as a novel and potential technology for dealing with these problems. The study also sheds light on benefits of microbial carbonate binders over the traditional agents and future directions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Austria | 1 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 186 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 183 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 17% |
| Researcher | 27 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 27 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 26 | 14% |
| Unknown | 52 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 31 | 17% |
| Environmental Science | 18 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 6% |
| Materials Science | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 38 | 20% |
| Unknown | 60 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 05 October 2019.
All research outputs
#3,240,099
of 24,885,505 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#2,896
of 28,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,123
of 233,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#26
of 182 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,885,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 28,434 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 233,464 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 182 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.