↓ Skip to main content

Lateral gene transfer in eukaryotes

Overview of attention for article published in Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, March 2005
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
368 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
402 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Lateral gene transfer in eukaryotes
Published in
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, March 2005
DOI 10.1007/s00018-005-4539-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. O. Andersson

Abstract

Lateral gene transfer -- the transfer of genetic material between species -- has been acknowledged as a major mechanism in prokaryotic genome evolution for some time. Recently accumulating data indicate that the process also occurs in the evolution of eukaryotic genomes. However, there are large rate variations between groups of eukaryotes; animals and fungi seem to be largely unaffected, with a few exceptions, while lateral gene transfer frequently occurs in protists with phagotrophic lifestyles, possibly with rates comparable to prokaryotic organisms. Gene transfers often facilitate the acquisition of functions encoded in prokaryotic genomes by eukaryotic organisms, which may enable them to colonize new environments. Transfers between eukaryotes also occur, mainly into larger phagotrophic eukaryotes that ingest eukaryotic cells, but also between plant lineages. These findings have implications for eukaryotic genomic research in general, and studies of the origin and phylogeny of eukaryotes in particular.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 402 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 11 3%
Germany 8 2%
Brazil 6 1%
Spain 5 1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Czechia 2 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Other 8 2%
Unknown 354 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 94 23%
Researcher 80 20%
Student > Master 56 14%
Student > Bachelor 50 12%
Professor 26 6%
Other 63 16%
Unknown 33 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 229 57%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 74 18%
Environmental Science 11 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 1%
Computer Science 4 <1%
Other 32 8%
Unknown 46 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 01 January 2019.
All research outputs
#2,260,312
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#276
of 4,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,654
of 60,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#3
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 60,556 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.