| Title |
The rainbow trout genome provides novel insights into evolution after whole-genome duplication in vertebrates
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ncomms4657 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Camille Berthelot, Frédéric Brunet, Domitille Chalopin, Amélie Juanchich, Maria Bernard, Benjamin Noël, Pascal Bento, Corinne Da Silva, Karine Labadie, Adriana Alberti, Jean-Marc Aury, Alexandra Louis, Patrice Dehais, Philippe Bardou, Jérôme Montfort, Christophe Klopp, Cédric Cabau, Christine Gaspin, Gary H. Thorgaard, Mekki Boussaha, Edwige Quillet, René Guyomard, Delphine Galiana, Julien Bobe, Jean-Nicolas Volff, Carine Genêt, Patrick Wincker, Olivier Jaillon, Hugues Roest Crollius, Yann Guiguen |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 51 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 10 | 20% |
| United States | 9 | 18% |
| France | 4 | 8% |
| Canada | 3 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Chile | 1 | 2% |
| Norway | 1 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 17 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 24 | 47% |
| Members of the public | 23 | 45% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 4% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 769 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 8 | 1% |
| United States | 6 | <1% |
| France | 5 | <1% |
| Japan | 4 | <1% |
| Norway | 3 | <1% |
| Sweden | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 10 | 1% |
| Unknown | 726 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 168 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 160 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 92 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 76 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 39 | 5% |
| Other | 122 | 16% |
| Unknown | 112 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 389 | 51% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 170 | 22% |
| Environmental Science | 22 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 11 | 1% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 8 | 1% |
| Other | 37 | 5% |
| Unknown | 132 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 171. 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 02 February 2023.
All research outputs
#241,695
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#3,506
of 58,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,894
of 242,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#21
of 535 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 58,328 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.4. 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 242,356 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 535 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.