↓ Skip to main content

Methylation of translation elongation factor 1A by the METTL10-like See1 methyltransferase facilitates tombusvirus replication in yeast and plants

Overview of attention for article published in Virology, October 2013
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Methylation of translation elongation factor 1A by the METTL10-like See1 methyltransferase facilitates tombusvirus replication in yeast and plants
Published in
Virology, October 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.virol.2013.09.012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhenghe Li, Paulina Alatriste Gonzalez, Zsuzsanna Sasvari, Terri Goss Kinzy, Peter D. Nagy

Abstract

Replication of tombusviruses and other plus-strand RNA viruses depends on several host factors that are recruited into viral replicase complexes. Previous studies have shown that eukaryotic translation elongation factor 1A (eEF1A) is one of the resident host proteins in the highly purified tombusvirus replicase complex. In this paper, we show that methylation of eEF1A by the METTL10-like See1p methyltransferase is required for tombusvirus and unrelated nodavirus RNA replication in yeast model host. Similar to the effect of SEE1 deletion, yeast expressing only a mutant form of eEF1A lacking the 4 known lysines subjected to methylation supported reduced TBSV accumulation. We show that the half-life of several viral replication proteins is decreased in see1Δ yeast or when a mutated eEF1A was expressed as a sole source for eEF1A. Silencing of the plant ortholog of See1 methyltransferase also decreased tombusvirus RNA accumulation in Nicotiana benthamiana.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Croatia 1 3%
Unknown 37 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 23%
Student > Master 7 18%
Other 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 23%
Linguistics 2 5%
Materials Science 2 5%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 7 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 December 2013.
All research outputs
#3,413,417
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Virology
#633
of 9,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,683
of 224,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virology
#5
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,498 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 224,559 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 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.