↓ Skip to main content

Protocol: a simple method for extracting next-generation sequencing quality genomic DNA from recalcitrant plant species

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Methods, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
179 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
691 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Protocol: a simple method for extracting next-generation sequencing quality genomic DNA from recalcitrant plant species
Published in
Plant Methods, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1746-4811-10-21
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam Healey, Agnelo Furtado, Tal Cooper, Robert J Henry

Abstract

Next-generation sequencing technologies rely on high quality DNA that is suitable for library preparation followed by sequencing. Some plant species store large amounts of phenolics and polysaccharides within their leaf tissue making genomic DNA extraction difficult. While many DNA extraction methods exist that contend with the presence of phenolics and polysaccharides, these methods rely on long incubations, multiple precipitations or commercially available kits to produce high molecular weight and contaminant-free DNA. In this protocol, we describe simple modifications to the established CTAB- based extraction method that allows for reliable isolation of high molecular weight genomic DNA from difficult to isolate plant species Corymbia (a eucalypt) and Coffea (coffee). The simplified protocol does not require multiple clean up steps or commercial based kits, and the isolated DNA passed stringent quality control standards for whole genome sequencing on Illumina HiSeq and TruSeq sequencing platforms.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 691 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Malaysia 2 <1%
Argentina 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Bolivia, Plurinational State of 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Other 9 1%
Unknown 665 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 134 19%
Student > Master 118 17%
Student > Bachelor 118 17%
Researcher 115 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 32 5%
Other 77 11%
Unknown 97 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 335 48%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 148 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 19 3%
Environmental Science 17 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 1%
Other 44 6%
Unknown 119 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 01 December 2021.
All research outputs
#3,934,049
of 19,602,522 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#216
of 926 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,085
of 199,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,602,522 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 926 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 199,068 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.