↓ Skip to main content

Expansion and evolutionary patterns of cysteine-rich peptides in plants

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Expansion and evolutionary patterns of cysteine-rich peptides in plants
Published in
BMC Genomics, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12864-017-3948-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xing Liu, Huping Zhang, Huijun Jiao, Leiting Li, Xin Qiao, Musana Rwalinda Fabrice, Juyou Wu, Shaoling Zhang

Abstract

Cysteine-rich peptides (CRPs) are gaining recognition as regulators of cell-cell communication in plants. We identified 9556 CRPs in 12 plant species and analysed their evolutionary patterns. In most angiosperm plants, whole genome duplication and segmental duplication are the major factors driving the expansion of CRP family member genes, especially signal peptides. About 30% of the CRP genes were found clustered on the chromosomes, except in maize (Zea mays). Considerable collinearities between CRP genes between or within species reveal several syntenic regions on the chromosomes. Different subfamilies display diverse evolutionary rates, suggesting that these subfamilies are subjected to different selective pressures. CRPs in different duplication models also show contrasting evolutionary rates, although the underlying mechanism is unclear because of the complexity of gene evolution. The 1281 positively selected genes identified are probably generated within a certain period of time. While most of these belonged to maize and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor), new CRP functions would also be expected. Up-regulation of 10 CRPs was observed in self-pollinated pear pistils and pollen tubes under self S-RNase treatments in vitro. The expression divergence between different CRP gene duplication types suggests that different duplication mechanisms affected the fate of the duplicated CRPs. Our analyses of the evolution of the CRP gene family provides a unique view of the evolution of this large gene family.

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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 20%
Student > Master 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Researcher 2 7%
Other 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 11 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Chemistry 2 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 12 40%
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 17 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,442,790
of 22,997,544 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#9,320
of 10,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#277,277
of 317,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#180
of 209 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,997,544 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,692 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 317,683 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 209 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.