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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Unexpected link between polyketide synthase and calcium carbonate biomineralization
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Zoological Letters, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40851-014-0001-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Motoki Hojo, Ai Omi, Gen Hamanaka, Kazutoshi Shindo, Atsuko Shimada, Mariko Kondo, Takanori Narita, Masato Kiyomoto, Yohei Katsuyama, Yasuo Ohnishi, Naoki Irie, Hiroyuki Takeda |
| Abstract |
Calcium carbonate biominerals participate in diverse physiological functions. Despite intensive studies, little is known about how mineralization is initiated in organisms. We analyzed the medaka spontaneous mutant, ha, defective in otolith (calcareous ear stone) formation. ha lacks a trigger for otolith mineralization, and the causative gene was found to encode polyketide synthase (pks), a multifunctional enzyme mainly found in bacteria, fungi, and plant. Subsequent experiments demonstrate that the products of medaka PKS, most likely polyketides or their derivatives, act as nucleation facilitators in otolith mineralization. The generality of this novel PKS function is supported by the essential role of echinoderm PKS in calcareous skeleton formation together with the presence of PKSs in a much wider range of animals from coral to vertebrates. The present study first links PKS to biomineralization and provides a genetic cue for biogeochemistry of carbon and calcium cycles. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 25% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Researcher | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 22% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 12 September 2022.
All research outputs
#3,281,077
of 23,317,888 outputs
Outputs from Zoological Letters
#49
of 171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,322
of 355,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Zoological Letters
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,317,888 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 171 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
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 355,864 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 63% of its contemporaries.