↓ Skip to main content

Genetic improvement of Pacific white shrimp [Penaeus (Litopenaeus) vannamei]: perspectives for genomic selection

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 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
Genetic improvement of Pacific white shrimp [Penaeus (Litopenaeus) vannamei]: perspectives for genomic selection
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2015.00093
Pubmed ID
Authors

Héctor Castillo-Juárez, Gabriel R. Campos-Montes, Alejandra Caballero-Zamora, Hugo H. Montaldo

Abstract

The uses of breeding programs for the Pacific white shrimp [Penaeus (Litopenaeus) vannamei] based on mixed linear models with pedigreed data are described. The application of these classic breeding methods yielded continuous progress of great value to increase the profitability of the shrimp industry in several countries. Recent advances in such areas as genomics in shrimp will allow for the development of new breeding programs in the near future that will increase genetic progress. In particular, these novel techniques may help increase disease resistance to specific emerging diseases, which is today a very important component of shrimp breeding programs. Thanks to increased selection accuracy, simulated genetic advance using genomic selection for survival to a disease challenge was up to 2.6 times that of phenotypic sib selection.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

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

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 136 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 14%
Researcher 14 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Other 28 20%
Unknown 31 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 63 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 17%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 5%
Environmental Science 2 1%
Unspecified 2 1%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 38 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 March 2015.
All research outputs
#13,197,285
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#2,944
of 11,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,932
of 263,362 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#90
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,761 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 263,362 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.