↓ Skip to main content

Global analysis of human duplicated genes reveals the relative importance of whole-genome duplicates originated in the early vertebrate evolution

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, January 2016
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
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
Global analysis of human duplicated genes reveals the relative importance of whole-genome duplicates originated in the early vertebrate evolution
Published in
BMC Genomics, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12864-016-2392-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Debarun Acharya, Tapash C. Ghosh

Abstract

Gene duplication is a genetic mutation that creates functionally redundant gene copies that are initially relieved from selective pressures and may adapt themselves to new functions with time. The levels of gene duplication may vary from small-scale duplication (SSD) to whole genome duplication (WGD). Studies with yeast revealed ample differences between these duplicates: Yeast WGD pairs were functionally more similar, less divergent in subcellular localization and contained a lesser proportion of essential genes. In this study, we explored the differences in evolutionary genomic properties of human SSD and WGD genes, with the identifiable human duplicates coming from the two rounds of whole genome duplication occurred early in vertebrate evolution. We observed that these two groups of duplicates were also dissimilar in terms of their evolutionary and genomic properties. But interestingly, this is not like the same observed in yeast. The human WGDs were found to be functionally less similar, diverge more in subcellular level and contain a higher proportion of essential genes than the SSDs, all of which are opposite from yeast. Additionally, we explored that human WGDs were more divergent in their gene expression profile, have higher multifunctionality and are more often associated with disease, and are evolutionarily more conserved than human SSDs. Our study suggests that human WGD duplicates are more divergent and entails the adaptation of WGDs to novel and important functions that consequently lead to their evolutionary conservation in the course of evolution.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 52 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Researcher 9 16%
Student > Master 9 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 4 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 34%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Physics and Astronomy 1 2%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 5 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 October 2017.
All research outputs
#14,245,321
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#5,704
of 10,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,006
of 395,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#172
of 277 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,655 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 395,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 277 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.