↓ Skip to main content

Decoding options and accuracy of translation of developmentally regulated UUA codon in Streptomyces: bioinformatic analysis

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
Title
Decoding options and accuracy of translation of developmentally regulated UUA codon in Streptomyces: bioinformatic analysis
Published in
SpringerPlus, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-2683-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ihor Rokytskyy, Oksana Koshla, Victor Fedorenko, Bohdan Ostash

Abstract

The gene bldA for leucyl [Formula: see text] is known for almost 30 years as a key regulator of morphogenesis and secondary metabolism in genus Streptomyces. Codon UUA is the rarest one in Streptomyces genomes and is present exclusively in genes with auxiliary functions. Delayed accumulation of translation-competent [Formula: see text] is believed to confine the expression of UUA-containing transcripts to stationary phase. Implicit to the regulatory function of UUA codon is the assumption about high accuracy of its translation, e.g. the latter should not occur in the absence of cognate [Formula: see text]. However, a growing body of facts points to the possibility of mistranslation of UUA-containing transcripts in the bldA-deficient mutants. It is not known what type of near-cognate tRNA(s) may decode UUA in the absence of cognate tRNA in Streptomyces, and whether UUA possesses certain inherent properties (such as increased/decreased accuracy of decoding) that would favor its use for regulatory purposes. Here we took bioinformatic approach to address these questions. We catalogued the entire complement of tRNA genes from several relevant Streptomyces and identified genes for posttranscriptional modifications of tRNA that might be involved in UUA decoding by cognate and near-cognate tRNAs. Based on tRNA gene content in Streptomyces genomes, we propose possible scenarios of UUA codon mistranslation. UUA is not associated with an increased rate of missense errors as compared to other leucyl codons, contrasting general belief that low-abundant codons are more error-prone than the high-abundant ones.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 18%
Student > Master 2 18%
Professor 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Unknown 3 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 27%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 9%
Chemistry 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Unknown 3 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,301
of 1,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#286,148
of 369,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#177
of 268 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 369,849 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 268 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.