| Title |
An improved method of constructing degradome library suitable for sequencing using Illumina platform
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Plant Methods, November 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13007-019-0524-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yong-Fang Li, Miao Zhao, Menglei Wang, Junqiang Guo, Li Wang, Jie Ji, Zongbo Qiu, Yun Zheng, Ramanjulu Sunkar |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Bangladesh | 1 | 11% |
| Canada | 1 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 07 December 2022.
All research outputs
#4,200,350
of 24,962,233 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#246
of 1,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,011
of 469,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#13
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,962,233 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 1,221 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 469,804 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.