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 |
Xenopus Resources: Transgenic, Inbred and Mutant Animals, Training Opportunities, and Web-Based Support
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, April 2019
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2019.00387 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marko Horb, Marcin Wlizla, Anita Abu-Daya, Sean McNamara, Dominika Gajdasik, Takeshi Igawa, Atsushi Suzuki, Hajime Ogino, Anna Noble, Centre de Ressource Biologique Xenope team in France, Jacques Robert, Christina James-Zorn, Matthew Guille, Morgane Nicolas, Thomas Lafond, Daniel Boujard, Yann Audic, Brigitte Guillet |
| Abstract |
Two species of the clawed frog family, Xenopus laevis and X. tropicalis, are widely used as tools to investigate both normal and disease-state biochemistry, genetics, cell biology, and developmental biology. To support both frog specialist and non-specialist scientists needing access to these models for their research, a number of centralized resources exist around the world. These include centers that hold live and frozen stocks of transgenic, inbred and mutant animals and centers that hold molecular resources. This infrastructure is supported by a model organism database. Here, we describe much of this infrastructure and encourage the community to make the best use of it and to guide the resource centers in developing new lines and libraries. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 27% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| Austria | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 9 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 60% |
| Scientists | 6 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 17% |
| Researcher | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 18 | 39% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 16 December 2022.
All research outputs
#2,943,642
of 25,011,008 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#1,563
of 15,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,616
of 356,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#73
of 416 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,011,008 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,369 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. 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 356,643 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 416 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.