Genome-wide mapping of methylated adenine residues in pathogenic Escherichia coli using single-molecule real-time sequencing

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Biotechnology, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

Readers on

mendeley
244 Mendeley
Title
Genome-wide mapping of methylated adenine residues in pathogenic Escherichia coli using single-molecule real-time sequencing
Published in
Nature Biotechnology, November 2012
DOI 10.1038/nbt.2432
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gang Fang, Diana Munera, David I Friedman, Anjali Mandlik, Michael C Chao, Onureena Banerjee, Zhixing Feng, Bojan Losic, Milind C Mahajan, Omar J Jabado, Gintaras Deikus, Tyson A Clark, Khai Luong, Iain A Murray, Brigid M Davis, Alona Keren-Paz, Andrew Chess, Richard J Roberts, Jonas Korlach, Steve W Turner, Vipin Kumar, Matthew K Waldor, Eric E Schadt

Abstract

Single-molecule real-time (SMRT) DNA sequencing allows the systematic detection of chemical modifications such as methylation but has not previously been applied on a genome-wide scale. We used this approach to detect 49,311 putative 6-methyladenine (m6A) residues and 1,407 putative 5-methylcytosine (m5C) residues in the genome of a pathogenic Escherichia coli strain. We obtained strand-specific information for methylation sites and a quantitative assessment of the frequency of methylation at each modified position. We deduced the sequence motifs recognized by the methyltransferase enzymes present in this strain without prior knowledge of their specificity. Furthermore, we found that deletion of a phage-encoded methyltransferase-endonuclease (restriction-modification; RM) system induced global transcriptional changes and led to gene amplification, suggesting that the role of RM systems extends beyond protecting host genomes from foreign DNA.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 22 9%
United Kingdom 5 2%
Germany 3 1%
Belgium 3 1%
Sweden 2 1%
Japan 2 1%
Norway 2 1%
Brazil 2 1%
China 1 0%
Other 8 3%
Unknown 194 80%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 35 14%
Other 20 8%
Librarian 12 5%
Professor 1 0%
Unknown 176 72%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biological Sciences 207 85%
Medicine 10 4%
Computer and Information Science 9 4%
Chemistry 5 2%
Engineering 4 2%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 7 3%

Score in context

This research output has an Altmetric score of 50. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This score was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 November 2015.
All research outputs
#82,910
of 4,720,522 outputs
Outputs from Nature Biotechnology
#270
of 3,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,489
of 82,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Biotechnology
#13
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,720,522 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 3,131 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean score of 17.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 score to the 82,772 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.