↓ Skip to main content

Recurrent acquisition of cytosine methyltransferases into eukaryotic retrotransposons

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
142 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
bluesky
2 Bluesky users

Readers on

mendeley
139 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
Recurrent acquisition of cytosine methyltransferases into eukaryotic retrotransposons
Published in
Nature Communications, April 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41467-018-03724-9
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Transposable elements are in a constant arms race with the silencing mechanisms of their host genomes. One silencing mechanism commonly used by many eukaryotes is dependent on cytosine methylation, a covalent modification of DNA deposited by C5 cytosine methyltransferases (DNMTs). Here, we report how two distantly related eukaryotic lineages, dinoflagellates and charophytes, have independently incorporated DNMTs into the coding regions of distinct retrotransposon classes. Concomitantly, we show that dinoflagellates of the genus Symbiodinium have evolved cytosine methylation patterns unlike any other eukaryote, with most of the genome methylated at CG dinucleotides. Finally, we demonstrate the ability of retrotransposon DNMTs to methylate CGs de novo, suggesting that retrotransposons could self-methylate retrotranscribed DNA. Together, this is an example of how retrotransposons incorporate host-derived genes involved in DNA methylation. In some cases, this event could have implications for the composition and regulation of the host epigenomic environment.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 142 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 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 139 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 31 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 20%
Student > Master 15 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 6%
Other 8 6%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 25 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 47 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 32%
Chemistry 3 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 1%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 30 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 83. 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 26 May 2026.
All research outputs
#646,909
of 34,295,391 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#10,741
of 82,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,358
of 372,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#224
of 1,212 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,295,391 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 82,503 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 49.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 372,640 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,212 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.