↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of the bacterial communities in feces from wild versus housed sables (Martes zibellina) by high-throughput sequence analysis of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene

Overview of attention for article published in AMB Express, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#49 of 904)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of the bacterial communities in feces from wild versus housed sables (Martes zibellina) by high-throughput sequence analysis of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene
Published in
AMB Express, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13568-016-0254-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu Guan, Honghai Zhang, Xiaodong Gao, Shuai Shang, Xiaoyang Wu, Jun Chen, Wei Zhang, Weihua Zhang, Mingsheng Jiang, Baohong Zhang, Peng Chen

Abstract

The composition of mammalian intestinal microflora is related to many environmental and geographical factors, and it plays an important role in many aspects such as growth and development. Sequencing data of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene from sable (Martes zibellina) samples using next-generation sequencing technology are limited. In our research, 84,116 reads obtained by high-throughput sequencing were analyzed to characterize and compare the intestinal microflora of wild sables and housed sables. Firmicutes (31.1 %), Bacteroidetes (26.0 %) and Proteobacteria (21.5 %) were the three most abundant phyla present in wild sables, whereas Firmicutes (55.6 %), Proteobacteria (29.1 %) and Actinobacteria (6.0 %) were the three predominant phyla present in housed sables. At the phylum level, wild sables exhibited a significant difference in the relative abundances of Bacteroidetes and Actinobacteria, whereas housed sables only exhibited significant changes in TM7 at the phylum level, and Clostridia, at the class level. The predominance of Bacteroidetes in wild sables warrants further research. These results indicate that a sudden change in diet may be a key factor that influences fecal bacterial diversity in mammals.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 41%
Student > Master 3 18%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Researcher 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 2 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 24%
Environmental Science 3 18%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 15 October 2016.
All research outputs
#2,287,603
of 14,362,363 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#49
of 904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,177
of 268,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#2
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,362,363 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 904 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 268,429 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.