↓ Skip to main content

Candida Species

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 15: Candida Species
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Candida Species
Chapter number 15
Book title
Candida Species
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-3052-4_15
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-3051-7, 978-1-4939-3052-4
Authors

Garcia-Hermoso, Dea, Desnos-Ollivier, Marie, Bretagne, Stéphane, Dea Garcia-Hermoso, Marie Desnos-Ollivier, Stéphane Bretagne

Abstract

To gain more insight into the epidemiological relationships between isolates of Candida spp. obtained from various origins, several molecular typing techniques have been developed. Two methods have emerged in the 2000s as soon as enough knowledge of the Candida spp. genomes was available to choose adequate loci and primers, namely microsatellite length polymorphism (MLP) and multilocus sequence typing (MLST). To contrast with previous PCR-based methods, specific amplifications with stringent conditions easily reproducible are the basis of MLP and MLST. MLST relies on Sanger sequencing to detect single-nucleotide polymorphisms within housekeeping genes. MLP needs a first in silico step to select tandemly repeated stretches of two to five nucleotides. One of the two primers used to amplify a microsatellite locus is labeled and fragment sizing is automatically performed using high-resolution electrophoresis platforms. MLST provides results easily comparable between laboratories and active MLST schemes are publicly available for the main Candida species. For comparative studies, MLP needs standards to compensate for the electrophoretic variations depending on the platforms used. Both methods can help us gain insight into the genetic relatedness of fungal isolates, both with advantages and drawbacks, and the choice of one method rather than the other depends on the task in question.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 3 19%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Unspecified 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 4 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 13%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 6 38%
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 25 May 2016.
All research outputs
#17,805,172
of 22,873,031 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#7,242
of 13,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,770
of 393,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#752
of 1,471 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,873,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,130 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 393,689 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,471 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.