↓ Skip to main content

Phylogenetic analysis of methionine synthesis genes from Thalassiosira pseudonana

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Phylogenetic analysis of methionine synthesis genes from Thalassiosira pseudonana
Published in
SpringerPlus, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40064-015-1163-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariusz A Bromke, Holger Hesse

Abstract

Diatoms are unicellular algae responsible for approximately 20% of global carbon fixation. Their evolution by secondary endocytobiosis resulted in a complex cellular structure and metabolism compared to algae with primary plastids. The sulfate assimilation and methionine synthesis pathways provide S-containing amino acids for the synthesis of proteins and a range of metabolites such as dimethylsulfoniopropionate. To obtain an insight into the localization and organization of the sulfur metabolism pathways we surveyed the genome of Thalassiosira pseudonana-a model organism for diatom research. We have identified and annotated genes for enzymes involved in respective pathways. Protein localization was predicted using similarities to known signal peptide motifs. We performed detailed phylogenetic analyses of enzymes involved in sulfate uptake/reduction and methionine metabolism. Moreover, we have found in up-stream sequences of studied diatoms methionine biosynthesis genes a conserved motif, which shows similarity to the Met31, a cis-motif regulating expression of methionine biosynthesis genes in yeast.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 31 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 33%
Researcher 5 15%
Other 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 7 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 27%
Environmental Science 2 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 8 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 August 2015.
All research outputs
#14,234,315
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#770
of 1,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,074
of 264,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#47
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,851 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 264,230 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 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 55% of its contemporaries.