| Title |
Evolutionary relationships of bacterial and archaeal glutamine synthetase genes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Molecular Evolution, June 1994
|
| DOI | 10.1007/bf00175876 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J.R. Brown, Y. Masuchi, F.T. Robb, W.F. Doolittlel |
| Abstract |
Glutamine synthetase (GS), an essential enzyme in ammonia assimilation and glutamine biosynthesis, has three distinctive types: GSI, GSII and GSIII. Genes for GSI have been found only in bacteria (eubacteria) and archaea (archaebacteria), while GSII genes only occur in eukaryotes and a few soil-dwelling bacteria. GSIII genes have been found in only a few bacterial species. Recently, it has been suggested that several lateral gene transfers of archaeal GSI genes to bacteria may have occurred. In order to study the evolution of GS, we cloned and sequenced GSI genes from two divergent archaeal species: the extreme thermophile Pyrococcus furiosus and the extreme halophile Haloferax volcanii. Our phylogenetic analysis, which included most available GS sequences, revealed two significant prokaryotic GSI subdivisions: GSI-alpha and GSI-beta. GSI-alpha-genes are found in the thermophilic bacterium, Thermotoga maritima, the low G+C Gram-positive bacteria, and the Euryarchaeota (includes methanogens, halophiles, and some thermophiles). GSI-beta-type genes occur in all other bacteria. GSI-alpha- and GSI-beta-type genes also differ with respect to a specific 25-amino-acid insertion and adenylylation control of GS enzyme activity, both absent in the former but present in the latter. Cyanobacterial genes lack adenylylation regulation of GS and may have secondarily lost it. The GSI gene of Sulfolobus solfataricus, a member of the Crenarchaeota (extreme thermophiles), is exceptional and could not be definitely placed in either subdivision. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 66 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 17% |
| Professor | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 6% |
| Researcher | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 14 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 28 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 17 | 24% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 1% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 17 | 24% |
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 July 2023.
All research outputs
#7,453,350
of 22,786,087 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#450
of 1,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,491
of 22,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,786,087 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 1,438 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 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 22,496 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 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.