↓ Skip to main content

Trends and future challenges in sampling the deep terrestrial biosphere

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Trends and future challenges in sampling the deep terrestrial biosphere
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00481
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J. Wilkins, Rebecca A. Daly, Paula J. Mouser, Ryan Trexler, Shihka Sharma, David R. Cole, Kelly C. Wrighton, Jennifer F. Biddle, Elizabeth H. Denis, Jim K. Fredrickson, Thomas L. Kieft, Tullis C. Onstott, Lee Peterson, Susan M. Pfiffner, Tommy J. Phelps, Matthew O. Schrenk

Abstract

Research in the deep terrestrial biosphere is driven by interest in novel biodiversity and metabolisms, biogeochemical cycling, and the impact of human activities on this ecosystem. As this interest continues to grow, it is important to ensure that when subsurface investigations are proposed, materials recovered from the subsurface are sampled and preserved in an appropriate manner to limit contamination and ensure preservation of accurate microbial, geochemical, and mineralogical signatures. On February 20th, 2014, a workshop on "Trends and Future Challenges in Sampling The Deep Subsurface" was coordinated in Columbus, Ohio by The Ohio State University and West Virginia University faculty, and sponsored by The Ohio State University and the Sloan Foundation's Deep Carbon Observatory. The workshop aims were to identify and develop best practices for the collection, preservation, and analysis of terrestrial deep rock samples. This document summarizes the information shared during this workshop.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
France 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 85 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 25%
Student > Master 8 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 13 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 24%
Environmental Science 16 18%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 14 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 7%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 19 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#7,201,896
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#7,639
of 24,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,997
of 243,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#66
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,656 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 243,384 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.