↓ Skip to main content

Comparative Genomics of Synechococcus elongatus Explains the Phenotypic Diversity of the Strains

Overview of attention for article published in mBio, April 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
patent
2 patents

Readers on

mendeley
47 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.
Article details
Title
Comparative Genomics of Synechococcus elongatus Explains the Phenotypic Diversity of the Strains
Published in
mBio, April 2022
DOI 10.1128/mbio.00862-22
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Strains of the freshwater cyanobacterium Synechococcus elongatus were first isolated approximately 60 years ago, and PCC 7942 is well established as a model for photosynthesis, circadian biology, and biotechnology research. The recent isolation of UTEX 3055 and subsequent discoveries in biofilm and phototaxis phenotypes suggest that lab strains of S. elongatus are highly domesticated. We performed a comprehensive genome comparison among the available genomes of S. elongatus and sequenced two additional laboratory strains to trace the loss of native phenotypes from the standard lab strains and determine the genetic basis of useful phenotypes. The genome comparison analysis provides a pangenome description of S. elongatus, as well as correction of extensive errors in the published sequence for the type strain PCC 6301. The comparison of gene sets and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) among strains clarifies strain isolation histories and, together with large-scale genome differences, supports a hypothesis of laboratory domestication. Prophage genes in laboratory strains, but not UTEX 3055, affect pigmentation, while unique genes in UTEX 3055 are necessary for phototaxis. The genomic differences identified in this study include previously reported SNPs that are, in reality, sequencing errors, as well as SNPs and genome differences that have phenotypic consequences. One SNP in the circadian response regulator rpaA that has caused confusion is clarified here as belonging to an aberrant clone of PCC 7942, used for the published genome sequence, that has confounded the interpretation of circadian fitness research. IMPORTANCE Synechococcus elongatus is a versatile and robust model cyanobacterium for photosynthetic metabolism and circadian biology research, with utility as a biological production platform. We compared the genomes of closely related S. elongatus strains to create a pangenome annotation to aid gene discovery for novel phenotypes. The comparative genomic analysis revealed the need for a new sequence of the species type strain PCC 6301 and includes two new sequences for S. elongatus strains PCC 6311 and PCC 7943. The genomic comparison revealed a pattern of early laboratory domestication of strains, clarifies the relationship between the strains PCC 6301 and UTEX 2973, and showed that differences in large prophage regions, operons, and even single nucleotides have effects on phenotypes as wide-ranging as pigmentation, phototaxis, and circadian gene expression.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Student > Master 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 21 45%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 15%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 24 51%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 03 July 2025.
All research outputs
#4,003,396
of 33,992,632 outputs
Outputs from mBio
#2,634
of 7,888 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,411
of 469,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from mBio
#56
of 209 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,992,632 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,888 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 469,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 209 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.