↓ Skip to main content

Comparative Genomics

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 7: A Practical Guide for Comparative Genomics of Mobile Genetic Elements in Prokaryotic Genomes
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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.
Chapter title
A Practical Guide for Comparative Genomics of Mobile Genetic Elements in Prokaryotic Genomes
Chapter number 7
Book title
Comparative Genomics
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-7463-4_7
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-7461-0, 978-1-4939-7463-4
Authors

Danillo Oliveira Alvarenga, Leandro M. Moreira, Mick Chandler, Alessandro M. Varani, Oliveira Alvarenga, Danillo, Moreira, Leandro M., Chandler, Mick, Varani, Alessandro M.

Abstract

Mobile genetic elements (MGEs) are an important feature of prokaryote genomes but are seldom well annotated and, consequently, are often underestimated. MGEs include transposons (Tn), insertion sequences (ISs), prophages, genomic islands (GEIs), integrons, and integrative and conjugative elements (ICEs). They are intimately involved in genome evolution and promote phenomena such as genomic expansion and rearrangement, emergence of virulence and pathogenicity, and symbiosis. In spite of the annotation bottleneck, there are so far at least 75 different programs and databases dedicated to prokaryotic MGE analysis and annotation, and this number is rapidly growing. Here, we present a practical guide to explore, compare, and visualize prokaryote MGEs using a combination of available software and databases tailored to small scale genome analyses. This protocol can be coupled with expert MGE annotation and exploited for evolutionary and comparative genomic analyses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 25%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 14 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 12%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 14 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 14 June 2020.
All research outputs
#7,542,740
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#2,338
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,698
of 442,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#230
of 1,498 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 442,345 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 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,498 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.