The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
SIPSim: A Modeling Toolkit to Predict Accuracy and Aid Design of DNA-SIP Experiments
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Microbiology, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00570 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicholas D. Youngblut, Samuel E. Barnett, Daniel H. Buckley |
| Abstract |
DNA Stable isotope probing (DNA-SIP) is a powerful method that links identity to function within microbial communities. The combination of DNA-SIP with multiplexed high throughput DNA sequencing enables simultaneous mapping of in situ assimilation dynamics for thousands of microbial taxonomic units. Hence, high throughput sequencing enabled SIP has enormous potential to reveal patterns of carbon and nitrogen exchange within microbial food webs. There are several different methods for analyzing DNA-SIP data and despite the power of SIP experiments, it remains difficult to comprehensively evaluate method accuracy across a wide range of experimental parameters. We have developed a toolset (SIPSim) that simulates DNA-SIP data, and we use this toolset to systematically evaluate different methods for analyzing DNA-SIP data. Specifically, we employ SIPSim to evaluate the effects that key experimental parameters (e.g., level of isotopic enrichment, number of labeled taxa, relative abundance of labeled taxa, community richness, community evenness, and beta-diversity) have on the specificity, sensitivity, and balanced accuracy (defined as the product of specificity and sensitivity) of DNA-SIP analyses. Furthermore, SIPSim can predict analytical accuracy and power as a function of experimental design and community characteristics, and thus should be of great use in the design and interpretation of DNA-SIP experiments. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 76 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 37% |
| Researcher | 16 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 34% |
| Environmental Science | 13 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 8% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 15 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 April 2018.
All research outputs
#5,815,414
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#5,531
of 25,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,440
of 329,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#199
of 601 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 329,912 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 601 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 65% of its contemporaries.