↓ Skip to main content

Endogenous RNA interference is driven by copy number

Overview of attention for article published in eLife, February 2014
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 (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Endogenous RNA interference is driven by copy number
Published in
eLife, February 2014
DOI 10.7554/elife.01581
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cristina Cruz, Jonathan Houseley

Abstract

A plethora of non-protein coding RNAs are produced throughout eukaryotic genomes, many of which are transcribed antisense to protein-coding genes and could potentially instigate RNA interference (RNAi) responses. Here we have used a synthetic RNAi system to show that gene copy number is a key factor controlling RNAi for transcripts from endogenous loci, since transcripts from multi-copy loci form double stranded RNA more efficiently than transcripts from equivalently expressed single-copy loci. Selectivity towards transcripts from high-copy DNA is therefore an emergent property of a minimal RNAi system. The ability of RNAi to selectively degrade transcripts from high-copy loci would allow suppression of newly emerging transposable elements, but such a surveillance system requires transcription. We show that low-level genome-wide pervasive transcription is sufficient to instigate RNAi, and propose that pervasive transcription is part of a defense mechanism capable of directing a sequence-independent RNAi response against transposable elements amplifying within the genome. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.01581.001.

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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Netherlands 1 1%
France 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 90 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 31%
Researcher 28 28%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Professor 4 4%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 7 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 63%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 23%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Computer Science 1 1%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 8 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 07 December 2021.
All research outputs
#3,539,778
of 22,641,687 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#7,803
of 13,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,353
of 312,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#47
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,641,687 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,705 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.0. 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 312,648 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 85% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.