| Title |
A phylogenetic analysis of the ubiquitin superfamily based on sequence and structural information
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Biology Reports, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11033-014-3486-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhen Yang, Haikui Chen, Xiaobo Yang, Xueshuai Wan, Lian He, Ruoyu Miao, Huayu Yang, Yang Zhong, Li Wang, Haitao Zhao |
| Abstract |
Ubiquitin belongs to an important class of protein modifier and gene expression regulator proteins that participates in various cellular processes. A large number of ubiquitin-related proteins have been identified during the last two decades. However, the evolutionary history of this ancient gene family remains largely unknown. We analyzed the members of the superfamily using both sequence- and structure-based methodology to better understand the evolution of ubiquitin-related proteins. As a part of these analyses we used the MEME algorithm to extract common sequence motifs across the superfamily, and we inferred the phylogeny and distribution of the superfamily members across multiple species. A total of 23 families were identified in the gene family. Several common sequence motifs were revealed and evaluated. We also found that the number of genes for ubiquitin-related proteins encoded within a specific genome correlates with the biological complexity of that particular species. This analysis should provide valuable insight into the sequence/function relationships and evolutionary history of ubiquitin and ubiquitin-related proteins. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 31% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 19% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 July 2015.
All research outputs
#13,410,148
of 22,758,248 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Biology Reports
#838
of 2,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,471
of 227,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Biology Reports
#16
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,248 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,894 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 227,467 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.