| Title |
Deletions in processed pseudogenes accumulate faster in rodents than in humans
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Molecular Evolution, April 1989
|
| DOI | 10.1007/bf02103423 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dan Graur, Yuval Shuali, Wen-Hsiung Li |
| Abstract |
The relative rates of point nucleotide substitution and accumulation of gap events (deletions and insertions) were calculated for 22 human and 30 rodent processed pseudogenes. Deletion events not only outnumbered insertions (the ratio being 7:1 and 3:1 for human and rodent pseudogenes, respectively), but also the total length of deletions was greater than that of insertions. Compared with their functional homologs, human processed pseudogenes were found to be shorter by about 1.2%, and rodent pseudogenes by about 2.3%. DNA loss from processed pseudogenes through deletion is estimated to be at least seven times faster in rodents than in humans. In comparison with the rate of point substitutions, the abridgment of pseudogenes during evolutionary times is a slow process that probably does not retard the rate of growth of the genome due to the proliferation of processed pseudogenes. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Greece | 1 | 2% |
| Sweden | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 49 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 8 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 28 | 53% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 23% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 8 | 15% |
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 25 December 2022.
All research outputs
#7,697,449
of 23,415,749 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#463
of 1,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,105
of 14,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,415,749 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,464 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. 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 14,827 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 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them