↓ Skip to main content

Physical and Functional Interaction between the Eukaryotic Orthologs of Prokaryotic Translation Initiation Factors IF1 and IF2

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular & Cellular Biology, March 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Physical and Functional Interaction between the Eukaryotic Orthologs of Prokaryotic Translation Initiation Factors IF1 and IF2
Published in
Molecular & Cellular Biology, March 2023
DOI 10.1128/mcb.20.19.7183-7191.2000
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To initiate protein synthesis, a ribosome with bound initiator methionyl-tRNA must be assembled at the start codon of an mRNA. This process requires the coordinated activities of three translation initiation factors (IF) in prokaryotes and at least 12 translation initiation factors in eukaryotes (eIF). The factors eIF1A and eIF5B from eukaryotes show extensive amino acid sequence similarity to the factors IF1 and IF2 from prokaryotes. By a combination of two-hybrid, coimmunoprecipitation, and in vitro binding assays eIF1A and eIF5B were found to interact directly, and the eIF1A binding site was mapped to the C-terminal region of eIF5B. This portion of eIF5B was found to be critical for growth in vivo and for translation in vitro. Overexpression of eIF1A exacerbated the slow-growth phenotype of yeast strains expressing C-terminally truncated eIF5B. These findings indicate that the physical interaction between the evolutionarily conserved factors eIF1A and eIF5B plays an important role in translation initiation, perhaps to direct or stabilize the binding of methionyl-tRNA to the ribosomal P site.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 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 %
Estonia 3 5%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 56 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 27%
Researcher 9 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Student > Master 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 16 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 23%
Computer Science 2 3%
Chemistry 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 16 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#12,527,423
of 34,763,505 outputs
Outputs from Molecular & Cellular Biology
#6,658
of 14,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,899
of 451,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular & Cellular Biology
#4,908
of 10,456 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,763,505 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,100 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 451,423 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10,456 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.