↓ Skip to main content

Investigating the functionality of a ribosome-binding mutant of NAA15 using Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 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
Investigating the functionality of a ribosome-binding mutant of NAA15 using Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Published in
BMC Research Notes, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13104-018-3513-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sylvia Varland, Thomas Arnesen

Abstract

N-terminal acetylation is a common protein modification that occurs preferentially co-translationally as the substrate N-terminus is emerging from the ribosome. The major N-terminal acetyltransferase complex A (NatA) is estimated to N-terminally acetylate more than 40% of the human proteome. To form a functional NatA complex the catalytic subunit NAA10 must bind the auxiliary subunit NAA15, which properly folds NAA10 for correct substrate acetylation as well as anchors the entire complex to the ribosome. Mutations in these two genes are associated with various neurodevelopmental disorders in humans. The aim of this study was to investigate the in vivo functionality of a Schizosaccharomyces pombe NAA15 mutant that is known to prevent NatA from associating with ribosomes, but retains NatA-specific activity in vitro. Here, we show that Schizosaccharomyces pombe NatA can functionally replace Saccharomyces cerevisiae NatA. We further demonstrate that the NatA ribosome-binding mutant Naa15 ΔN K6E is unable to rescue the temperature-sensitive growth phenotype of budding yeast lacking NatA. This finding indicates the in vivo importance of the co-translational nature of NatA-mediated N-terminal acetylation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 1 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 11%
Student > Master 1 11%
Researcher 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Unknown 3 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 11%
Neuroscience 1 11%
Chemistry 1 11%
Unknown 3 33%
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 23 June 2018.
All research outputs
#17,981,442
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#2,851
of 4,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,208
of 328,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#80
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,287 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 328,678 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.