↓ Skip to main content

Cell Press

Article Metrics

Identifying Recent Adaptations in Large-Scale Genomic Data

Overview of attention for article published in Cell, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
509 Mendeley
citeulike
15 CiteULike
Title
Identifying Recent Adaptations in Large-Scale Genomic Data
Published in
Cell, January 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.cell.2013.01.035
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pardis C. Sabeti

Abstract

Although several hundred regions of the human genome harbor signals of positive natural selection, few of the relevant adaptive traits and variants have been elucidated. Using full-genome sequence variation from the 1000 Genomes (1000G) Project and the composite of multiple signals (CMS) test, we investigated 412 candidate signals and leveraged functional annotation, protein structure modeling, epigenetics, and association studies to identify and extensively annotate candidate causal variants. The resulting catalog provides a tractable list for experimental follow-up; it includes 35 high-scoring nonsynonymous variants, 59 variants associated with expression levels of a nearby coding gene or lincRNA, and numerous variants associated with susceptibility to infectious disease and other phenotypes. We experimentally characterized one candidate nonsynonymous variant in Toll-like receptor 5 (TLR5) and show that it leads to altered NF-κB signaling in response to bacterial flagellin. PAPERFLICK:

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 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 509 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 21 4%
Germany 7 1%
Italy 6 1%
United Kingdom 6 1%
Spain 5 <1%
France 3 <1%
China 3 <1%
Austria 2 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Other 18 4%
Unknown 436 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 171 34%
Researcher 126 25%
Professor > Associate Professor 43 8%
Student > Master 41 8%
Student > Bachelor 40 8%
Other 88 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 384 75%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 58 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 4%
Computer Science 11 2%
Unspecified 6 1%
Other 29 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 82. 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 21 November 2014.
All research outputs
#88,486
of 7,527,746 outputs
Outputs from Cell
#556
of 8,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,805
of 308,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell
#33
of 444 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,527,746 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,880 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 308,958 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 444 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 92% of its contemporaries.