↓ Skip to main content

Evolutionary and sequence-based relationships in bacterial AdoMet-dependent non-coding RNA methyltransferases

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Evolutionary and sequence-based relationships in bacterial AdoMet-dependent non-coding RNA methyltransferases
Published in
BMC Research Notes, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1756-0500-7-440
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeanneth Mosquera-Rendón, Sonia Cárdenas-Brito, Juan D Pineda, Mauricio Corredor, Alfonso Benítez-Páez

Abstract

RNA post-transcriptional modification is an exciting field of research that has evidenced this editing process as a sophisticated epigenetic mechanism to fine tune the ribosome function and to control gene expression. Although tRNA modifications seem to be more relevant for the ribosome function and cell physiology as a whole, some rRNA modifications have also been seen to play pivotal roles, essentially those located in central ribosome regions. RNA methylation at nucleobases and ribose moieties of nucleotides appear to frequently modulate its chemistry and structure. RNA methyltransferases comprise a superfamily of highly specialized enzymes that accomplish a wide variety of modifications. These enzymes exhibit a poor degree of sequence similarity in spite of using a common reaction cofactor and modifying the same substrate type.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 34%
Student > Master 7 22%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 25%
Computer Science 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 19%

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 August 2014.
All research outputs
#9,442,212
of 11,816,931 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,794
of 2,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,483
of 188,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#69
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,816,931 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 2,603 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 188,622 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.