↓ Skip to main content

Nucleotide Substitution Rate of Mammalian Mitochondrial Genomes

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Molecular Evolution, April 1999
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
389 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
308 Mendeley
Title
Nucleotide Substitution Rate of Mammalian Mitochondrial Genomes
Published in
Journal of Molecular Evolution, April 1999
DOI 10.1007/pl00006487
Pubmed ID
Authors

Graziano Pesole, Carmela Gissi, Anna De Chirico, Cecilia Saccone

Abstract

We present here for the first time a comprehensive study based on the analysis of closely related organisms to provide an accurate determination of the nucleotide substitution rate in mammalian mitochondrial genomes. This study examines the evolutionary pattern of the different functional mtDNA regions as accurately as possible on the grounds of available data, revealing some important "genomic laws." The main conclusions can be summarized as follows. (1) High intragenomic variability in the evolutionary dynamic of mtDNA was found. The substitution rate is strongly dependent on the region considered, and slow- and fast-evolving regions can be identified. Nonsynonymous sites, the D-loop central domain, and tRNA and rRNA genes evolve much more slowly than synonymous sites and the two peripheral D-loop region domains. The synonymous rate is fairly uniform over the genome, whereas the rate of nonsynonymous sites depends on functional constraints and therefore differs considerably between genes. (2) The commonly accepted statement that mtDNA evolves more rapidly than nuclear DNA is valid only for some regions, thus it should be referred to specific mitochondrial components. In particular, nonsynonymous sites show comparable rates in mitochondrial and nuclear genes; synonymous sites and small rRNA evolve about 20 times more rapidly and tRNAs about 100 times more rapidly in mitochondria than in their nuclear counterpart. (3) A species-specific evolution is particularly evident in the D-loop region. As the divergence times of the organism pairs under consideration are known with sufficient accuracy, absolute nucleotide substitution rates are also provided.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 308 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
Germany 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 10 3%
Unknown 278 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 62 20%
Researcher 61 20%
Student > Master 48 16%
Student > Bachelor 22 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 7%
Other 58 19%
Unknown 36 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 188 61%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 44 14%
Environmental Science 10 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 2%
Other 12 4%
Unknown 43 14%
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 08 October 2016.
All research outputs
#8,759,452
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#516
of 1,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,307
of 37,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 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 1,502 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 37,785 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.