↓ Skip to main content

Analyzing Immunoglobulin Repertoires

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
91 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
399 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
Analyzing Immunoglobulin Repertoires
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00462
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neha Chaudhary, Duane R. Wesemann

Abstract

Somatic assembly of T cell receptor and B cell receptor (BCR) genes produces a vast diversity of lymphocyte antigen recognition capacity. The advent of efficient high-throughput sequencing of lymphocyte antigen receptor genes has recently generated unprecedented opportunities for exploration of adaptive immune responses. With these opportunities have come significant challenges in understanding the analysis techniques that most accurately reflect underlying biological phenomena. In this regard, sample preparation and sequence analysis techniques, which have largely been borrowed and adapted from other fields, continue to evolve. Here, we review current methods and challenges of library preparation, sequencing and statistical analysis of lymphocyte receptor repertoire studies. We discuss the general steps in the process of immune repertoire generation including sample preparation, platforms available for sequencing, processing of sequencing data, measurable features of the immune repertoire, and the statistical tools that can be used for analysis and interpretation of the data. Because BCR analysis harbors additional complexities, such as immunoglobulin (Ig) (i.e., antibody) gene somatic hypermutation and class switch recombination, the emphasis of this review is on Ig/BCR sequence analysis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 399 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 399 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 77 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 64 16%
Student > Master 43 11%
Student > Bachelor 40 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 5%
Other 47 12%
Unknown 108 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 86 22%
Immunology and Microbiology 70 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 69 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 5%
Engineering 7 2%
Other 27 7%
Unknown 120 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 17 May 2021.
All research outputs
#1,902,899
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#1,792
of 32,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,865
of 352,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#54
of 702 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,042 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 352,409 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 702 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.