↓ Skip to main content

The alveolate translation initiation factor 4E family reveals a custom toolkit for translational control in core dinoflagellates

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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 alveolate translation initiation factor 4E family reveals a custom toolkit for translational control in core dinoflagellates
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12862-015-0301-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Grant D Jones, Ernest P Williams, Allen R Place, Rosemary Jagus, Tsvetan R Bachvaroff

Abstract

Dinoflagellates are eukaryotes with unusual cell biology and appear to rely on translational rather than transcriptional control of gene expression. The eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E (eIF4E) plays an important role in regulating gene expression because eIF4E binding to the mRNA cap is a control point for translation. eIF4E is part of an extended, eukaryote-specific family with different members having specific functions, based on studies of model organisms. Dinoflagellate eIF4E diversity could provide a mechanism for dinoflagellates to regulate gene expression in a post-transcriptional manner. Accordingly, eIF4E family members from eleven core dinoflagellate transcriptomes were surveyed to determine the diversity and phylogeny of the eIF4E family in dinoflagellates and related lineages including apicomplexans, ciliates and heterokonts.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 3%
Poland 1 3%
Unknown 32 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 21%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Master 4 12%
Professor 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 24%
Environmental Science 2 6%
Unspecified 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 26%
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 18 April 2015.
All research outputs
#16,287,458
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2,326
of 2,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,695
of 364,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#46
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,908 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 364,356 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.