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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Efficient gene targeting by TAL effector nucleases coinjected with exonucleases in zygotes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep01253 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tomoji Mashimo, Takehito Kaneko, Tetsushi Sakuma, Junya Kobayashi, Yayoi Kunihiro, Birger Voigt, Takashi Yamamoto, Tadao Serikawa |
| Abstract |
TAL Effector Nucleases (TALENs) are versatile tools for targeted gene editing in various species. However, their efficiency is still insufficient, especially in mammalian embryos. Here, we showed that combined expression of Exonuclease 1 (Exo1) with engineered site-specific TALENs provided highly efficient disruption of the endogenous gene in rat fibroblast cells. A similar increased efficiency of up to ~30% with Exo1 was also observed in fertilized rat eggs, and in the production of knockout rats for the albino (Tyr) gene. These findings demonstrate TALENs with Exo1 is an easy and efficient method of generating gene knockouts using zygotes, which increases the range of gene targeting technologies available to various species. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 3 | 75% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Japan | 2 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Bulgaria | 1 | <1% |
| Slovenia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 144 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 41 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 88 | 58% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 32 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 3% |
| Engineering | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 7% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 13 June 2019.
All research outputs
#3,257,271
of 22,696,971 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#28,178
of 122,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,526
of 287,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#135
of 462 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,696,971 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 122,281 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 287,582 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 462 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 70% of its contemporaries.