↓ Skip to main content

Contrasting Patterns of Sequence Evolution at the Functionally Redundant bric à brac Paralogs in Drosophila melanogaster

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Molecular Evolution, July 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Contrasting Patterns of Sequence Evolution at the Functionally Redundant bric à brac Paralogs in Drosophila melanogaster
Published in
Journal of Molecular Evolution, July 2009
DOI 10.1007/s00239-009-9265-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ryan D. Bickel, Wendy S. Schackwitz, Len A. Pennacchio, Sergey V. Nuzhdin, Artyom Kopp

Abstract

Genes with overlapping expression and function may gradually diverge despite retaining some common functions. To test whether such genes show distinct patterns of molecular evolution within species, we examined sequence variation at the bric à brac (bab) locus of Drosophila melanogaster. This locus is composed of two anciently duplicated paralogs, bab1 and bab2, which are involved in patterning the adult abdomen, legs, and ovaries. We have sequenced the 148 kb genomic region spanning the bab1 and bab2 genes from 94 inbred lines of D. melanogaster sampled from a single location. Two non-coding regions, one in each paralog, appear to be under selection. The strongest evidence of directional selection is found in a region of bab2 that has no known functional role. The other region is located in the bab1 paralog and is known to contain a cis-regulatory element that controls sex-specific abdominal pigmentation. The coding region of bab1 appears to be under stronger functional constraint than the bab2 coding sequences. Thus, the two paralogs are evolving under different selective regimes in the same natural population, illuminating the different evolutionary trajectories of partially redundant duplicate genes.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 2 5%
France 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 35 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 38%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 21%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Professor 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 4 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 56%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 18%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 5 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 17 February 2011.
All research outputs
#4,676,928
of 22,705,019 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#236
of 1,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,199
of 110,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,705,019 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 110,417 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them