↓ Skip to main content

Saltational evolution of the heterotrimeric G protein signaling mechanisms in the plant kingdom

Overview of attention for article published in Science Signaling, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
8 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Saltational evolution of the heterotrimeric G protein signaling mechanisms in the plant kingdom
Published in
Science Signaling, September 2016
DOI 10.1126/scisignal.aaf9558
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daisuke Urano, Natsumi Maruta, Yuri Trusov, Richard Stoian, Qingyu Wu, Ying Liang, Dinesh Kumar Jaiswal, Leena Thung, David Jackson, José Ramón Botella, Alan M Jones

Abstract

Signaling proteins evolved diverse interactions to provide specificity for distinct stimuli. Signaling complexity in the G protein (heterotrimeric guanosine triphosphate-binding protein) network was achieved in animals through subunit duplication and incremental evolution. By combining comprehensive and quantitative phenotypic profiles of Arabidopsis thaliana with protein evolution informatics, we found that plant heterotrimeric G protein machinery evolved by a saltational (jumping) process. Sequence similarity scores mapped onto tertiary structures, and biochemical validation showed that the extra-large Gα (XLG) subunit evolved extensively in the charophycean algae (an aquatic green plant) by gene duplication and gene fusion. In terrestrial plants, further evolution uncoupled XLG from its negative regulator, regulator of G protein signaling, but preserved an α-helix region that enables interaction with its partner Gβγ. The ancestral gene evolved slowly due to the molecular constraints imposed by the need for the protein to maintain interactions with various partners, whereas the genes encoding XLG proteins evolved rapidly to produce three highly divergent members. Analysis of A. thaliana mutants indicated that these Gα and XLG proteins all function with Gβγ and evolved to operate both independently and cooperatively. The XLG-Gβγ machinery specialized in environmental stress responses, whereas the canonical Gα-Gβγ retained developmental roles. Some developmental processes, such as shoot development, involve both Gα and XLG acting cooperatively or antagonistically. These extensive and rapid evolutionary changes in XLG structure compared to those of the canonical Gα subunit contrast with the accepted notion of how pathway diversification occurs through gene duplication with subsequent incremental coevolution of residues among interacting proteins.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 2%
Unknown 59 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Master 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 21 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 27%
Chemistry 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 20 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 13 October 2016.
All research outputs
#839,017
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Science Signaling
#336
of 3,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,086
of 320,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science Signaling
#14
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 320,232 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.