↓ Skip to main content

A Second Mammalian Antizyme: Conservation of Programmed Ribosomal Frameshifting

Overview of attention for article published in Genomics, September 1998
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
101 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Second Mammalian Antizyme: Conservation of Programmed Ribosomal Frameshifting
Published in
Genomics, September 1998
DOI 10.1006/geno.1998.5434
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ivaylo P. Ivanov, Raymond F. Gesteland, John F. Atkins

Abstract

A second mammalian ornithine decarboxylase antizyme was discovered. The deduced protein sequence of the human antizyme2 is 54% identical and 67% similar to human antizyme1 but 99.5% identical to mouse antizyme2. Polyamine-regulated programmed ribosomal frameshifting is used in decoding antizyme2 mRNA as it is for antizyme1 mRNA. The mRNA signals for the programmed frameshifting are similar in the mRNAs for the two antizymes. However, in the stimulatory pseudoknot 3' of the shift site, while the sequences of the stems are highly conserved, the sequences of the loops are divergent. Functional distinctions between antizymes seem likely, but no distinction in the tissue distribution of human antizyme1 and 2 mRNAs was distinguished, though antizyme2 mRNA is 16-fold less abundant than its antizyme1 counterpart. In addition to the previously characterized human antizyme1 mRNA, a second antizyme1 mRNA with an additional 160 nucleotides at its 3' end was identified, and it has a tissue distribution different from that of the shorter antizyme1 mRNA.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 29%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Professor 5 13%
Student > Master 4 11%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 55%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 4 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 11 September 2017.
All research outputs
#5,446,629
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Genomics
#859
of 5,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,714
of 31,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genomics
#12
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,923 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
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 31,201 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.