↓ Skip to main content

Evolution of proteins of the cystatin superfamily

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Molecular Evolution, January 1990
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
256 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Evolution of proteins of the cystatin superfamily
Published in
Journal of Molecular Evolution, January 1990
DOI 10.1007/bf02102453
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neil D. Rawlings, Alan J. Barrett

Abstract

We have examined the amino acid sequences of a number of proteins that have been suggested to be related to chicken cystatin, a protein from chicken egg white that inhibits cysteine proteinases. On the basis of statistical analysis, the following proteins were found to be members of the cystatin superfamily: human cystatin A, rat cystatin A(alpha), human cystatin B, rat cystatin B(beta), rice cystatin, human cystatin C, ox colostrum cystatin, human cystatin S, human cystatin SA, human cystatin SN, chicken cystatin, puff adder cystatin, human kininogen, ox kininogen, rat kininogen, rat T-kininogens 1 and 2, human alpha 2HS-glycoprotein, and human histidine-rich glycoprotein. Fibronectin is shown not to be a member of this superfamily, and the c-Ha-ras oncogene protein p21 (Val-12) probably is not a member also. It was convenient to divide members of the superfamily into four types on the basis of the presence of one, two, or three copies of cystatin-like segments and the presence or absence of disulfide bonds. Evolutionary dendrograms were calculated by three methods, and from these we have constructed a scheme depicting the sequence of events in the evolution of these proteins. We suggest that about 1000 million years ago a precursor containing disulfide loops appeared, and that all disulfide-containing cystatins are derived from this. We follow the evolution of the proteins of the superfamily along four main lineages, with special attention to the part that duplication of segments has played in the development of the more complex molecules.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
India 1 2%
Russia 1 2%
Unknown 55 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 22%
Professor 7 12%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 10 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Chemistry 2 3%
Physics and Astronomy 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 10 17%
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 06 November 2022.
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
#11,612
of 58,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Molecular Evolution
#2
of 6 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 58,776 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.