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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Msh2-Msh3 Interferes with Okazaki Fragment Processing to Promote Trinucleotide Repeat Expansions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cell Reports, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.celrep.2012.06.020 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Athena Kantartzis, Gregory M. Williams, Lata Balakrishnan, Rick L. Roberts, Jennifer A. Surtees, Robert A. Bambara |
| Abstract |
Trinucleotide repeat (TNR) expansions are the underlying cause of more than 40 neurodegenerative and neuromuscular diseases, including myotonic dystrophy and Huntington's disease. Although genetic evidence points to errors in DNA replication and/or repair as the cause of these diseases, clear molecular mechanisms have not been described. Here, we focused on the role of the mismatch repair complex Msh2-Msh3 in promoting TNR expansions. We demonstrate that Msh2-Msh3 promotes CTG and CAG repeat expansions in vivo in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Furthermore, we provide biochemical evidence that Msh2-Msh3 directly interferes with normal Okazaki fragment processing by flap endonuclease1 (Rad27) and DNA ligase I (Cdc9) in the presence of TNR sequences, thereby producing small, incremental expansion events. We believe that this is the first mechanistic evidence showing the interplay of replication and repair proteins in the expansion of sequences during lagging-strand DNA replication. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 70 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 21 | 30% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 17 | 24% |
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 12 September 2012.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Cell Reports
#12,129
of 12,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,086
of 179,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell Reports
#45
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 12,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 179,272 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.