↓ Skip to main content

A new social gene in Dictyostelium discoideum, chtB

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
8 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
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
A new social gene in Dictyostelium discoideum, chtB
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-13-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lorenzo A Santorelli, Adam Kuspa, Gad Shaulsky, David C Queller, Joan E Strassmann

Abstract

Competitive social interactions are ubiquitous in nature, but their genetic basis is difficult to determine. Much can be learned from single gene knockouts in a eukaryote microbe. The mutants can be competed with the parent to discern the social impact of that specific gene. Dictyostelium discoideum is a social amoeba that exhibits cooperative behavior in the construction of a multicellular fruiting body. It is a good model organism to study the genetic basis of cooperation since it has a sequenced genome and it is amenable to genetic manipulation. When two strains of D. discoideum are mixed, a cheater strain can exploit its social partner by differentiating more spore than its fair share relative to stalk cells. Cheater strains can be generated in the lab or found in the wild and genetic analyses have shown that cheating behavior can be achieved through many pathways.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Japan 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Unknown 57 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 27%
Researcher 10 16%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 3 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 65%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 16%
Physics and Astronomy 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 5 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 24 December 2023.
All research outputs
#750,140
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#149
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,613
of 290,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 290,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.