↓ Skip to main content

Drosophila Models for Human Diseases

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 1: Drosophila as a Model Organism
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
376 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
Drosophila as a Model Organism
Chapter number 1
Book title
Drosophila Models for Human Diseases
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-981-13-0529-0_1
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-9-81-130528-3, 978-9-81-130529-0
Authors

Masamitsu Yamaguchi, Hideki Yoshida, Yamaguchi, Masamitsu, Yoshida, Hideki

Abstract

Drosophila melanogaster has been widely used in classical and modern genetics for more than 100 years. The history of the Drosophila model in the study of various aspects of life sciences will be summarized in this chapter. Furthermore, commonly used techniques and tools with Drosophila models will be briefly described, with a special emphasis on the advantages of Drosophila models in the study of various human diseases.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 376 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 376 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 77 20%
Student > Master 49 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 9%
Researcher 15 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 4%
Other 29 8%
Unknown 159 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 111 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 11%
Neuroscience 11 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 2%
Environmental Science 7 2%
Other 38 10%
Unknown 160 43%
Attention Score in Context

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 29 June 2018.
All research outputs
#23,196,437
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#4,308
of 5,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#394,473
of 453,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#195
of 243 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 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 5,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. 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 453,192 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 243 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.