↓ Skip to main content

ANALYSIS OF ALEXANDRIUM TAMARENSE (DINOPHYCEAE) GENES REVEALS THE COMPLEX EVOLUTIONARY HISTORY OF A MICROBIAL EUKARYOTE1

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Phycology, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
ANALYSIS OF ALEXANDRIUM TAMARENSE (DINOPHYCEAE) GENES REVEALS THE COMPLEX EVOLUTIONARY HISTORY OF A MICROBIAL EUKARYOTE1
Published in
Journal of Phycology, June 2012
DOI 10.1111/j.1529-8817.2012.01194.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cheong Xin Chan, Marcelo B. Soares, Maria F. Bonaldo, Jennifer H. Wisecaver, Jeremiah D. Hackett, Donald M. Anderson, Deana L. Erdner, Debashish Bhattacharya

Abstract

Microbial eukaryotes may extinguish much of their nuclear phylogenetic history due to endosymbiotic/horizontal gene transfer (E/HGT). We studied E/HGT in 32,110 contigs of expressed sequence tags (ESTs) from the dinoflagellate Alexandrium tamarense (Dinophyceae) using a conservative phylogenomic approach. The vast majority of predicted proteins (86.4%) in this alga are novel or dinoflagellate-specific. We searched for putative homologs of these predicted proteins against a taxonomically broadly sampled protein database that includes all currently available data from algae and protists and reconstructed a phylogeny from each of the putative homologous protein sets. Of the 2,523 resulting phylogenies, 14-17% are potentially impacted by E/HGT involving both prokaryote and eukaryote lineages, with 2-4% showing clear evidence of reticulate evolution. The complex evolutionary histories of the remaining proteins, many of which may also have been affected by E/HGT, cannot be interpreted using our approach with currently available gene data. We present empirical evidence of reticulate genome evolution that combined with inadequate or highly complex phylogenetic signal in many proteins may impede genome-wide approaches to infer the tree of microbial eukaryotes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 4%
Chile 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 50 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 24%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Master 8 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 9%
Professor 5 9%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 62%
Environmental Science 4 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 9 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 May 2012.
All research outputs
#19,917,373
of 24,477,448 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Phycology
#1,561
of 1,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,181
of 167,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Phycology
#12
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,477,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,856 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 167,748 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.