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 |
Misannotation Awareness: A Tale of Two Gene-Groups
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2016.00868 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tania Nobre, M. Doroteia Campos, Eva Lucic-Mercy, Birgit Arnholdt-Schmitt |
| Abstract |
Incorrectly or simply not annotated data is largely increasing in most public databases, undoubtedly caused by the rise in sequence data and the more recent boom of genomic projects. Molecular biologists and bioinformaticists should join efforts to tackle this issue. Practical challenges have been experienced when studying the alternative oxidase (AOX) gene family, and hence the motivation for the present work. Commonly used databases were screened for their capacity to distinguish AOX from the plastid terminal oxidase (also called plastoquinol terminal oxidase; PTOX) and we put forward a simple approach, based on amino acids signatures, that unequivocally distinguishes these gene families. Further, available sequence data on the AOX family in plants was carefully revised to: (1) confirm the classification as AOX and (2) identify to which AOX family member they belong to. We bring forward the urgent need of misannotation awareness and re-annotation of public AOX sequences by highlighting different types of misclassifications and the large under-estimation of data availability. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 32% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 23% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 July 2016.
All research outputs
#18,171,423
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#12,559
of 21,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,454
of 327,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#265
of 532 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 21,221 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 327,731 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 532 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.