Direct selection of human genomic loci by microarray hybridization
Impact in
- Genetics 203
Classified as
- Journal
- Nature Methods
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1038/nmeth1111 →Countries where authors are citing Direct selection of human genomic loci by microarray hybridization
This map shows the geographic impact of Direct selection of human genomic loci by microarray hybridization. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Direct selection of human genomic loci by microarray hybridization with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Direct selection of human genomic loci by microarray hybridization more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Direct selection of human genomic loci by microarray hybridization
This network shows the impact of Direct selection of human genomic loci by microarray hybridization. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Direct selection of human genomic loci by microarray hybridization.
About Direct selection of human genomic loci by microarray hybridization
This paper, published in 2007, received 506 indexed citations . Written by Thomas J. Albert, Michael Molla, Donna M. Muzny, Lynne Nazareth, David A. Wheeler, Xingzhi Song, Todd Richmond, Matthew J. Rodesch, George M. Weinstock and Richard A. Gibbs covering the research area of Molecular Biology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Molecular Biology (317 citations), Genetics (203 citations), Plant Science (90 citations), Cancer Research (89 citations) and Ecology (33 citations). Published in Nature Methods.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.
This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1038/nmeth1111.