↓ Skip to main content

Evolutionary instability of CUG-Leu in the genetic code of budding yeasts

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, May 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 (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
51 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
Evolutionary instability of CUG-Leu in the genetic code of budding yeasts
Published in
Nature Communications, May 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41467-018-04374-7
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The genetic code used in nuclear genes is almost universal, but here we report that it changed three times in parallel during the evolution of budding yeasts. All three changes were reassignments of the codon CUG, which is translated as serine (in 2 yeast clades), alanine (1 clade), or the 'universal' leucine (2 clades). The newly discovered Ser2 clade is in the final stages of a genetic code transition. Most species in this clade have genes for both a novel tRNASer(CAG) and an ancestral tRNALeu(CAG) to read CUG, but only tRNASer(CAG) is used in standard growth conditions. The coexistence of these alloacceptor tRNA genes indicates that the genetic code transition occurred via an ambiguous translation phase. We propose that the three parallel reassignments of CUG were not driven by natural selection in favor of their effects on the proteome, but by selection to eliminate the ancestral tRNALeu(CAG).

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 51 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 119 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 119 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 23%
Researcher 17 14%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 30 25%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 44 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 7%
Chemistry 3 3%
Chemical Engineering 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 33 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 31 March 2023.
All research outputs
#1,268,650
of 34,644,748 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#20,768
of 83,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,686
of 372,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#394
of 1,175 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,644,748 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83,722 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 75% 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 372,914 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,175 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 66% of its contemporaries.