| Title |
Measuring the effects of particle orientation to improve the efficiency of electron cryomicroscopy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41467-017-00782-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katerina Naydenova, Christopher J. Russo |
| Abstract |
The orientation distribution of a single-particle electron cryomicroscopy specimen limits the resolution of the reconstructed density map. Here we define a statistical quantity, the efficiency, E od, which characterises the orientation distribution via its corresponding point spread function. The efficiency measures the ability of the distribution to provide uniform information and resolution in all directions of the reconstruction, independent of other factors. This metric allows rapid and rigorous evaluation of specimen preparation methods, assisting structure determination to high resolution with minimal data.A number of parameters influence the resolution of a cryo-EM structure. Here the authors investigate the effects of specimen orientation in single particle cryo-EM and present open-source software for rapidly assessing orientation distributions to improve data collection. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 54 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 States | 12 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 10 | 19% |
| Germany | 3 | 6% |
| Australia | 3 | 6% |
| Japan | 2 | 4% |
| France | 2 | 4% |
| Spain | 2 | 4% |
| Bolivia, Plurinational State of | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 28% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 30 | 56% |
| Scientists | 22 | 41% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 181 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 42 | 23% |
| Researcher | 30 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 22 | 12% |
| Unknown | 39 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 77 | 43% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 33 | 18% |
| Chemistry | 8 | 4% |
| Engineering | 5 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Unknown | 44 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 08 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,127,088
of 25,460,914 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#17,795
of 57,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,664
of 325,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#416
of 1,086 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,460,914 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 57,172 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 325,546 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,086 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.