↓ Skip to main content

The Genetic Code Is One in a Million

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Molecular Evolution, September 1998
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 1,486)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
4 blogs
twitter
2 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages
video
4 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
467 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
240 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
The Genetic Code Is One in a Million
Published in
Journal of Molecular Evolution, September 1998
DOI 10.1007/pl00006381
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen J. Freeland, Laurence D. Hurst

Abstract

Statistical and biochemical studies of the genetic code have found evidence of nonrandom patterns in the distribution of codon assignments. It has, for example, been shown that the code minimizes the effects of point mutation or mistranslation: erroneous codons are either synonymous or code for an amino acid with chemical properties very similar to those of the one that would have been present had the error not occurred. This work has suggested that the second base of codons is less efficient in this respect, by about three orders of magnitude, than the first and third bases. These results are based on the assumption that all forms of error at all bases are equally likely. We extend this work to investigate (1) the effect of weighting transition errors differently from transversion errors and (2) the effect of weighting each base differently, depending on reported mistranslation biases. We find that if the bias affects all codon positions equally, as might be expected were the code adapted to a mutational environment with transition/transversion bias, then any reasonable transition/transversion bias increases the relative efficiency of the second base by an order of magnitude. In addition, if we employ weightings to allow for biases in translation, then only 1 in every million random alternative codes generated is more efficient than the natural code. We thus conclude not only that the natural genetic code is extremely efficient at minimizing the effects of errors, but also that its structure reflects biases in these errors, as might be expected were the code the product of selection.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 240 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 10 4%
United Kingdom 4 2%
Germany 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 7 3%
Unknown 210 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 24%
Researcher 47 20%
Student > Bachelor 23 10%
Student > Master 22 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 19 8%
Other 55 23%
Unknown 17 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 98 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 47 20%
Physics and Astronomy 13 5%
Computer Science 10 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 4%
Other 43 18%
Unknown 20 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,111,408
of 25,657,205 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#22
of 1,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#436
of 31,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,657,205 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,486 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 31,345 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 92% of its contemporaries.