↓ Skip to main content

The primordial metabolism: an ancestral interconnection between leucine, arginine, and lysine biosynthesis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, August 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
The primordial metabolism: an ancestral interconnection between leucine, arginine, and lysine biosynthesis
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, August 2007
DOI 10.1186/1471-2148-7-s2-s3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marco Fondi, Matteo Brilli, Giovanni Emiliani, Donatella Paffetti, Renato Fani

Abstract

It is generally assumed that primordial cells had small genomes with simple genes coding for enzymes able to react with a wide range of chemically related substrates, interconnecting different metabolic routes. New genes coding for enzymes with a narrowed substrate specificity arose by paralogous duplication(s) of ancestral ones and evolutionary divergence. In this way new metabolic pathways were built up by primordial cells. Useful hints to disclose the origin and evolution of ancestral metabolic routes and their interconnections can be obtained by comparing sequences of enzymes involved in the same or different metabolic routes. From this viewpoint, the lysine, arginine, and leucine biosynthetic routes represent very interesting study-models. Some of the lys, arg and leu genes are paralogs; this led to the suggestion that their ancestor genes might interconnect the three pathways. The aim of this work was to trace the evolutionary pathway leading to the appearance of the extant biosynthetic routes and to try to disclose the interrelationships existing between them and other pathways in the early stages of cellular evolution.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Switzerland 1 1%
India 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
China 1 1%
Unknown 63 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 17%
Student > Master 11 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 11 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 17%
Computer Science 3 4%
Chemistry 3 4%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 13 18%
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 25 July 2021.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#1,997
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,623
of 70,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#18
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 70,810 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.