↓ Skip to main content

A simple and efficient total genomic DNA extraction method for individual zooplankton

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
A simple and efficient total genomic DNA extraction method for individual zooplankton
Published in
SpringerPlus, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-3724-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hanafiah Fazhan, Khor Waiho, Md. Sheriff Shahreza

Abstract

Molecular approaches are widely applied in species identification and taxonomic studies of minute zooplankton. One of the most focused zooplankton nowadays is from Subclass Copepoda. Accurate species identification of all life stages of the generally small sized copepods through molecular analysis is important, especially in taxonomic and systematic assessment of harpacticoid copepod populations and to understand their dynamics within the marine community. However, total genomic DNA (TGDNA) extraction from individual harpacticoid copepods can be problematic due to their small size and epibenthic behavior. In this research, six TGDNA extraction methods done on individual harpacticoid copepods were compared. The first new simple, feasible, efficient and consistent TGDNA extraction method was designed and compared with the commercial kit and modified available TGDNA extraction methods. The newly described TGDNA extraction method, "Incubation in PCR buffer" method, yielded good and consistent results based on the high success rate of PCR amplification (82%) compared to other methods. Coupled with its relatively consistent and economical method the "Incubation in PCR buffer" method is highly recommended in the TGDNA extraction of other minute zooplankton species.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 20%
Researcher 11 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 20 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 14%
Environmental Science 6 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 21 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 May 2017.
All research outputs
#15,459,013
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#942
of 1,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,691
of 417,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#46
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,854 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 417,191 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.