↓ Skip to main content

Event inference in multidomain families with phylogenetic reconciliation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Event inference in multidomain families with phylogenetic reconciliation
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-16-s14-s8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maureen Stolzer, Katherine Siewert, Han Lai, Minli Xu, Dannie Durand

Abstract

Reconstructing evolution provides valuable insights into the processes of gene evolution and function. However, while there have been great advances in algorithms and software to reconstruct the history of gene families, these tools do not model the domain shuffling events (domain duplication, insertion, transfer, and deletion) that drive the evolution of multidomain protein families. Protein evolution through domain shuffling events allows for rapid exploration of functions by introducing new combinations of existing folds. This powerful mechanism was key to some significant evolutionary innovations, such as multicellularity and the vertebrate immune system. A method for reconstructing this important evolutionary process is urgently needed. Here, we introduce a novel, event-based framework for studying multidomain evolution by reconciling a domain tree with a gene tree, with additional information provided by the species tree. In the context of this framework, we present the first reconciliation algorithms to infer domain shuffling events, while addressing the challenges inherent in the inference of evolution across three levels of organization. We apply these methods to the evolution of domains in the Membrane associated Guanylate Kinase family. These case studies reveal a more vivid and detailed evolutionary history than previously provided. Our algorithms have been implemented in software, freely available at http://www.cs.cmu.edu/˜durand/Notung.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 4%
Unknown 26 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 30%
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Master 3 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 6 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 30%
Computer Science 1 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Chemistry 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 26%
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 02 January 2023.
All research outputs
#18,945,879
of 23,476,369 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,438
of 7,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,989
of 276,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#127
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,476,369 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,394 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 276,826 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.