The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Fluorescent protein tagging as a tool to define the subcellular distribution of proteins in plants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2013.00214 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sandra K. Tanz, Ian Castleden, Ian D. Small, A. Harvey Millar |
| Abstract |
Fluorescent protein (FP) tagging approaches are widely used to determine the subcellular location of plant proteins. Here we give a brief overview of FP approaches, highlight potential technical problems, and discuss what to consider when designing FP/protein fusion constructs and performing transformation assays. We analyze published FP tagging data sets along with data from proteomics studies collated in SUBA3, a subcellular location database for Arabidopsis proteins, and assess the reliability of these data sets by comparing them. We also outline the limitations of the FP tagging approach for defining protein location and investigate multiple localization claims by FP tagging. We conclude that the collation of localization datasets in databases like SUBA3 is helpful for revealing discrepancies in location attributions by different techniques and/or by different research groups. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Bolivia, Plurinational State of | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 128 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 15% |
| Researcher | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 34 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 48 | 37% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 31 | 24% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | 2% |
| Unknown | 40 | 31% |
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 24 June 2013.
All research outputs
#20,195,024
of 22,712,476 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#15,851
of 19,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,758
of 280,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#241
of 517 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,712,476 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,949 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 280,743 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 517 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.