↓ Skip to main content

Seeing the forest for the genes: using metagenomics to infer the aggregated traits of microbial communities

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, November 2014
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 (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
24 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
111 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
338 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
Seeing the forest for the genes: using metagenomics to infer the aggregated traits of microbial communities
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00614
Pubmed ID
Authors

Noah Fierer, Albert Barberán, Daniel C. Laughlin

Abstract

Most environments harbor large numbers of microbial taxa with ecologies that remain poorly described and characterizing the functional capabilities of whole communities remains a key challenge in microbial ecology. Shotgun metagenomic analyses are increasingly recognized as a powerful tool to understand community-level attributes. However, much of this data is under-utilized due, in part, to a lack of conceptual strategies for linking the metagenomic data to the most relevant community-level characteristics. Microbial ecologists could benefit by borrowing the concept of community-aggregated traits (CATs) from plant ecologists to glean more insight from the ever-increasing amount of metagenomic data being generated. CATs can be used to quantify the mean and variance of functional traits found in a given community. A CAT-based strategy will often yield far more useful information for predicting the functional attributes of diverse microbial communities and changes in those attributes than the more commonly used analytical strategies. A more careful consideration of what CATs to measure and how they can be quantified from metagenomic data, will help build a more integrated understanding of complex microbial communities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 338 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 13 4%
Brazil 4 1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 314 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 97 29%
Researcher 72 21%
Student > Master 48 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 6%
Student > Bachelor 19 6%
Other 40 12%
Unknown 41 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 152 45%
Environmental Science 55 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 13 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 13 4%
Other 18 5%
Unknown 60 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 16 April 2015.
All research outputs
#2,956,531
of 26,538,386 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#2,334
of 30,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,255
of 271,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#19
of 197 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,538,386 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,410 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 271,782 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 197 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 90% of its contemporaries.