| Title |
The Last Universal Common Ancestor: emergence, constitution and genetic legacy of an elusive forerunner
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biology Direct, July 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1745-6150-3-29 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicolas Glansdorff, Ying Xu, Bernard Labedan |
| Abstract |
Since the reclassification of all life forms in three Domains (Archaea, Bacteria, Eukarya), the identity of their alleged forerunner (Last Universal Common Ancestor or LUCA) has been the subject of extensive controversies: progenote or already complex organism, prokaryote or protoeukaryote, thermophile or mesophile, product of a protracted progression from simple replicators to complex cells or born in the cradle of "catalytically closed" entities? We present a critical survey of the topic and suggest a scenario. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 33% |
| France | 1 | 7% |
| Comoros | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 53% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 87% |
| Scientists | 1 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 465 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 11 | 2% |
| Brazil | 8 | 2% |
| India | 4 | <1% |
| Mexico | 3 | <1% |
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Colombia | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 19 | 4% |
| Unknown | 409 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 104 | 22% |
| Researcher | 88 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 57 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 52 | 11% |
| Professor | 25 | 5% |
| Other | 78 | 17% |
| Unknown | 61 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 210 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 53 | 11% |
| Environmental Science | 21 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 4% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 18 | 4% |
| Other | 73 | 16% |
| Unknown | 71 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 90. 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 27 January 2024.
All research outputs
#467,734
of 25,365,817 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#11
of 536 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#817
of 93,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,365,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 536 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 93,592 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 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