↓ Skip to main content

Evidence of taxa-, clone-, and kin-discrimination in protists: ecological and evolutionary implications

Overview of attention for article published in Evolutionary Ecology, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Evidence of taxa-, clone-, and kin-discrimination in protists: ecological and evolutionary implications
Published in
Evolutionary Ecology, August 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10682-014-9721-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Avelina Espinosa, Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C

Abstract

Unicellular eukaryotes, or protists, are among the most ancient organisms on Earth. Protists belong to multiple taxonomic groups; they are widely distributed geographically and in all environments. Their ability to discriminate among con- and heterospecifics has been documented during the past decade. Here we discuss exemplar cases of taxa-, clone-, and possible kin-discrimination in five major lineages: Mycetozoa (Dictyostelium, Polysphondylium), Dikarya (Saccharomyces), Ciliophora (Tetrahymena), Apicomplexa (Plasmodium) and Archamoebae (Entamoeba). We summarize the proposed genetic mechanisms involved in discrimination-mediated aggregation (self versus different), including the csA, FLO and trg (formerly lag) genes, and the Proliferation Activation Factors (PAFs), which facilitate clustering in some protistan taxa. We caution about the experimental challenges intrinsic to studying recognition in protists, and highlight the opportunities for exploring the ecology and evolution of complex forms of cell-cell communication, including social behavior, in a polyphyletic, still superficially understood group of organisms. Because unicellular eukaryotes are the evolutionary precursors of multicellular life, we infer that their mechanisms of taxa-, clone-, and possible kin-discrimination gave origin to the complex diversification and sophistication of traits associated with species and kin recognition in plants, fungi, invertebrates and vertebrates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 5%
Unknown 18 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 26%
Professor 5 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 16%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Environmental Science 1 5%
Physics and Astronomy 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 3 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 March 2016.
All research outputs
#13,175,336
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Evolutionary Ecology
#419
of 721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,103
of 232,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolutionary Ecology
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 232,002 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.