↓ Skip to main content

Use of whole genome sequences to develop a molecular phylogenetic framework for Rhodococcus fascians and the Rhodococcus genus

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Use of whole genome sequences to develop a molecular phylogenetic framework for Rhodococcus fascians and the Rhodococcus genus
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2014.00406
Pubmed ID
Authors

Allison L. Creason, Edward W. Davis, Melodie L. Putnam, Olivier M. Vandeputte, Jeff H. Chang

Abstract

The accurate diagnosis of diseases caused by pathogenic bacteria requires a stable species classification. Rhodococcus fascians is the only documented member of its ill-defined genus that is capable of causing disease on a wide range of agriculturally important plants. Comparisons of genome sequences generated from isolates of Rhodococcus associated with diseased plants revealed a level of genetic diversity consistent with them representing multiple species. To test this, we generated a tree based on more than 1700 homologous sequences from plant-associated isolates of Rhodococcus, and obtained support from additional approaches that measure and cluster based on genome similarities. Results were consistent in supporting the definition of new Rhodococcus species within clades containing phytopathogenic members. We also used the genome sequences, along with other rhodococcal genome sequences to construct a molecular phylogenetic tree as a framework for resolving the Rhodococcus genus. Results indicated that Rhodococcus has the potential for having 20 species and also confirmed a need to revisit the taxonomic groupings within Rhodococcus.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 50 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 33%
Researcher 11 21%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Master 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 10%
Environmental Science 4 8%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 9 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 August 2014.
All research outputs
#14,198,795
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#8,109
of 20,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,304
of 235,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#63
of 159 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,060 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 235,512 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 159 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 59% of its contemporaries.