| Title |
Closing the loop: 3C versus DNA FISH
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-016-1081-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luca Giorgetti, Edith Heard |
| Abstract |
Chromosome conformation capture (3C)-based techniques have revolutionized the field of nuclear organization, partly replacing DNA FISH as the method of choice for studying three-dimensional chromosome architecture. Although DNA FISH is commonly used for confirming 3C-based findings, the two techniques are conceptually and technically different and comparing their results is not trivial. Here, we discuss both 3C-based techniques and DNA FISH approaches to highlight their similarities and differences. We then describe the technical biases that affect each approach, and review the available reports that address their compatibility. Finally, we propose an experimental scheme for comparison of 3C and DNA FISH results. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 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 | 8 | 35% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 13% |
| Germany | 2 | 9% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 4% |
| Austria | 1 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 52% |
| Scientists | 10 | 43% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Lithuania | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 221 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 73 | 31% |
| Researcher | 44 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 29 | 12% |
| Unknown | 37 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 95 | 41% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 67 | 29% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 10 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 12 | 5% |
| Unknown | 43 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 November 2016.
All research outputs
#2,996,806
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,245
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,734
of 323,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#41
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 323,147 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.