↓ Skip to main content

Molecular mechanisms of autophagy in plants: Role of ATG8 proteins in formation and functioning of autophagosomes

Overview of attention for article published in Biochemistry, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Molecular mechanisms of autophagy in plants: Role of ATG8 proteins in formation and functioning of autophagosomes
Published in
Biochemistry, May 2016
DOI 10.1134/s0006297916040052
Pubmed ID
Authors

V. V. Ryabovol, F. V. Minibayeva

Abstract

Autophagy is an efficient way of degradation and removal of unwanted or damaged intracellular components in plant cells. It plays an important role in recycling of intracellular structures (during starvation, removal of cell components formed during plant development or damaged by various stress factors) and in programmed cell death. Morphologically, autophagy is characterized by the formation of double-membrane vesicles called autophagosomes, which are essential for the isolation and degradation of cytoplasmic components. Among autophagic (ATG) proteins, ATG8 from the ubiquitin-like protein family plays a key role in autophagosome formation. ATG8 is also involved in selective autophagy, fusion of autophagosome with the vacuole, and some other intracellular processes not associated with autophagy. In contrast to yeasts that carry a single ATG8 gene, plants have multigene ATG8 families. The reason for such great ATG8 diversity in plants remains unclear. It is also unknown whether all members of the ATG8 family are involved in the formation and functioning of autophagosomes. To answer these questions, the identification of the structure and the possible functions of plant proteins from ATG8 family is required. In this review, we analyze the structures of ATG8 proteins from plants and their homologs from yeast and animal cells, interactions of ATG8 proteins with functional ligands, and involvement of ATG8 proteins in different metabolic processes in eukaryotes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 12 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 19%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Researcher 5 9%
Other 14 25%
Unknown 4 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 28%
Unspecified 12 21%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Unknown 7 12%
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 14 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Biochemistry
#19,491
of 22,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,219
of 333,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biochemistry
#93
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,288 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 333,268 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.