↓ Skip to main content

An emerging phylogenetic core of Archaea: phylogenies of transcription and translation machineries converge following addition of new genome sequences

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Evolutionary Biology, June 2005
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
An emerging phylogenetic core of Archaea: phylogenies of transcription and translation machineries converge following addition of new genome sequences
Published in
BMC Evolutionary Biology, June 2005
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-5-36
Pubmed ID
Authors

Céline Brochier, Patrick Forterre, Simonetta Gribaldo

Abstract

The concept of a genomic core, defined as the set of genes ubiquitous in all genomes of a monophyletic group, has become crucial in comparative and evolutionary genomics. However, it is still a matter of debate whether lateral gene transfers (LGT) may affect the components of genomic cores, preventing their use to retrace species evolution. We have recently reconstructed the phylogeny of Archaea by using two large concatenated datasets of core proteins involved in translation and transcription, respectively. The resulting trees were largely congruent, showing that informational gene components of the archaeal genomic core belonging to two distinct molecular systems contain a coherent signal for archaeal phylogeny. However, some incongruence remained between the two phylogenies. This may be due either to undetected LGT and/or to a lack of sufficient phylogenetic signal in the datasets.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
France 2 2%
Brazil 2 2%
South Africa 2 2%
Netherlands 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
India 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 79 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 24%
Student > Master 13 14%
Professor 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 14 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 67%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 12%
Environmental Science 7 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 3 3%

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 04 March 2014.
All research outputs
#7,762,614
of 12,373,386 outputs
Outputs from BMC Evolutionary Biology
#1,789
of 2,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,060
of 193,863 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Evolutionary Biology
#18
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,386 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 193,863 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.