↓ Skip to main content

Training set determination for genomic selection

Overview of attention for article published in Theoretical & Applied Genetics, July 2019
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Training set determination for genomic selection
Published in
Theoretical & Applied Genetics, July 2019
DOI 10.1007/s00122-019-03387-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jen-Hsiang Ou, Chen-Tuo Liao

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 33%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 80%
Unspecified 2 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%

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 04 July 2019.
All research outputs
#10,813,640
of 13,589,056 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical & Applied Genetics
#1,886
of 2,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,367
of 248,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical & Applied Genetics
#38
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,589,056 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,176 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 248,851 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.