↓ Skip to main content

Investigating ancient duplication events in the Arabidopsis genome

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Structural and Functional Genomics, March 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 104)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Investigating ancient duplication events in the Arabidopsis genome
Published in
Journal of Structural and Functional Genomics, March 2003
DOI 10.1023/a:1022666020026
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeroen Raes, Klaas Vandepoele, Cedric Simillion, Yvan Saeys, Yves Van de Peer

Abstract

The complete genomic analysis of Arabidopsis thaliana has shown that a major fraction of the genome consists of paralogous genes that probably originated through one or more ancient large-scale gene or genome duplication events. However, the number and timing of these duplications still remains unclear, and several different hypotheses have been put forward recently. Here, we reanalyzed duplicated blocks found in the Arabidopsis genome described previously and determined their date of divergence based on silent substitution estimations between the paralogous genes and, where possible, by phylogenetic reconstruction. We show that methods based on averaging protein distances of heterogeneous classes of duplicated genes lead to unreliable conclusions and that a large fraction of blocks duplicated much more recently than assumed previously. We found clear evidence for one large-scale gene or even complete genome duplication event somewhere between 70 to 90 million years ago. Traces pointing to a much older (probably more than 200 million years) large-scale gene duplication event could be detected. However, for now it is impossible to conclude whether these old duplicates are the result of one or more large-scale gene duplication events.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Belgium 1 3%
Unknown 29 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 35%
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Student > Master 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 65%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 13%
Environmental Science 2 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Unknown 4 13%
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 21 April 2014.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Structural and Functional Genomics
#27
of 104 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,141
of 62,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Structural and Functional Genomics
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 104 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 62,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.