↓ Skip to main content

Directed evolution of cell size in Escherichia coli

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 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
Directed evolution of cell size in Escherichia coli
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12862-014-0257-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mari Yoshida, Saburo Tsuru, Naoko Hirata, Shigeto Seno, Hideo Matsuda, Bei-Wen Ying, Tetsuya Yomo

Abstract

BackgroundIn bacteria, cell size affects chromosome replication, the assembly of division machinery, cell wall synthesis, membrane synthesis and ultimately growth rate. In addition, cell size can also be a target for Darwinian evolution for protection from predators. This strong coupling of cell size and growth, however, could lead to the introduction of growth defects after size evolution. An important question remains: can bacterial cell size change and/or evolve without imposing a growth burden?ResultsThe directed evolution of particular cell sizes, without a growth burden, was tested with a laboratory Escherichia coli strain. Cells of defined size ranges were collected by a cell sorter and were subsequently cultured. This selection-propagation cycle was repeated, and significant changes in cell size were detected within 400 generations. In addition, the width of the size distribution was altered. The changes in cell size were unaccompanied by a growth burden. Whole genome sequencing revealed that only a few mutations in genes related to membrane synthesis conferred the size evolution.ConclusionsIn conclusion, bacterial cell size could evolve, through a few mutations, without growth reduction. The size evolution without growth reduction suggests a rapid evolutionary change to diverse cell sizes in bacterial survival strategies.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
India 1 1%
Colombia 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 83 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 28%
Researcher 19 22%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Student > Master 7 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 11 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 43 49%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 23%
Physics and Astronomy 3 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Chemical Engineering 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 13 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 December 2014.
All research outputs
#14,604,834
of 25,383,225 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2,213
of 3,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,914
of 343,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#40
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,383,225 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,347 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 343,413 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.