↓ Skip to main content

RNA processing in the minimal organism Nanoarchaeum equitans

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
RNA processing in the minimal organism Nanoarchaeum equitans
Published in
Genome Biology, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/gb-2012-13-7-r63
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lennart Randau

Abstract

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The minimal genome of the tiny, hyperthermophilic archaeon Nanoarchaeum equitans contains several fragmented genes and revealed unusual RNA processing pathways. These include the maturation of tRNA molecules via the trans-splicing of tRNA halves and genomic rearrangements to compensate for the absence of RNase P. RESULTS: Here, the RNA processing events in the N. equitans cell are analyzed using RNA-Seq deep sequencing methodology. All tRNA half precursor and tRNA termini were determined and support the tRNA trans-splicing model. The processing of CRISPR RNAs from two CRISPR clusters was verified. Twenty-seven C/D box small RNAs (sRNAs) and a H/ACA box sRNA were identified. The C/D box sRNAs were found to flank split genes, to form dicistronic tRNA-sRNA precursors and to be encoded within the tRNAMet intron. CONCLUSIONS: The presented data provide an overview of the production and usage of small RNAs in a cell that has to survive with a highly reduced genome. N. equitans lost many essential metabolic pathways but maintains highly active CRISPR/Cas and rRNA modification systems that appear to play an important role in genome fragmentation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 4%
Japan 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 89 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 28%
Researcher 22 23%
Student > Master 15 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 11 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 47 49%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 25%
Computer Science 4 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 12 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 24 March 2018.
All research outputs
#5,446,210
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,945
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,599
of 178,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#25
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 178,036 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 76% of its contemporaries.
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 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.