↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of Francisella tularensis genomes reveals evolutionary events associated with the emergence of human pathogenic strains

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology, June 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
4 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
196 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
citeulike
5 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
Comparison of Francisella tularensis genomes reveals evolutionary events associated with the emergence of human pathogenic strains
Published in
Genome Biology, June 2007
DOI 10.1186/gb-2007-8-6-r102
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laurence Rohmer, Christine Fong, Simone Abmayr, Michael Wasnick, Theodore J Larson Freeman, Matthew Radey, Tina Guina, Kerstin Svensson, Hillary S Hayden, Michael Jacobs, Larry A Gallagher, Colin Manoil, Robert K Ernst, Becky Drees, Danielle Buckley, Eric Haugen, Donald Bovee, Yang Zhou, Jean Chang, Ruth Levy, Regina Lim, Will Gillett, Don Guenthener, Allison Kang, Scott A Shaffer, Greg Taylor, Jinzhi Chen, Byron Gallis, David A D'Argenio, Mats Forsman, Maynard V Olson, David R Goodlett, Rajinder Kaul, Samuel I Miller, Mitchell J Brittnacher

Abstract

Francisella tularensis subspecies tularensis and holarctica are pathogenic to humans, whereas the two other subspecies, novicida and mediasiatica, rarely cause disease. To uncover the factors that allow subspecies tularensis and holarctica to be pathogenic to humans, we compared their genome sequences with the genome sequence of Francisella tularensis subspecies novicida U112, which is nonpathogenic to humans. Comparison of the genomes of human pathogenic Francisella strains with the genome of U112 identifies genes specific to the human pathogenic strains and reveals pseudogenes that previously were unidentified. In addition, this analysis provides a coarse chronology of the evolutionary events that took place during the emergence of the human pathogenic strains. Genomic rearrangements at the level of insertion sequences (IS elements), point mutations, and small indels took place in the human pathogenic strains during and after differentiation from the nonpathogenic strain, resulting in gene inactivation. The chronology of events suggests a substantial role for genetic drift in the formation of pseudogenes in Francisella genomes. Mutations that occurred early in the evolution, however, might have been fixed in the population either because of evolutionary bottlenecks or because they were pathoadaptive (beneficial in the context of infection). Because the structure of Francisella genomes is similar to that of the genomes of other emerging or highly pathogenic bacteria, this evolutionary scenario may be shared by pathogens from other species.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 5%
Sweden 3 3%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Thailand 1 1%
Unknown 85 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 19%
Student > Master 13 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 9%
Professor 5 5%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 11 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Chemical Engineering 1 1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 15 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 27 May 2020.
All research outputs
#3,798,945
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,558
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,600
of 82,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#12
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 82,463 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.