↓ Skip to main content

MTE1 Functions with MPH1 in Double-Strand Break Repair

Overview of attention for article published in Genetics, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
MTE1 Functions with MPH1 in Double-Strand Break Repair
Published in
Genetics, May 2016
DOI 10.1534/genetics.115.185454
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Double-strand DNA breaks occur upon exposure of cells to ionizing radiation and certain chemical agents or indirectly through replication fork collapse at DNA damage sites. If left unrepaired, double-strand breaks can cause genome instability and cell death, and their repair can result in loss of heterozygosity. In response to DNA damage, proteins involved in double-strand break repair by homologous recombination re-localize into discrete nuclear foci. We identified 29 proteins that colocalize with recombination repair protein Rad52 in response to DNA damage. Of particular interest, Ygr042w/Mte1, a protein of unknown function, showed robust colocalization with Rad52. Mte1 foci fail to form when the DNA helicase gene MPH1 is absent. Mte1 and Mph1 form a complex and are recruited to double-strand breaks in vivo in a mutually dependent manner. MTE1 is important for resolution of Rad52 foci during double-strand break repair and for suppressing break-induced replication. Together our data indicate that Mte1 functions with Mph1 in double-strand break repair.

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 8 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 47 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 11 22%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 07 November 2020.
All research outputs
#5,162,762
of 27,786,078 outputs
Outputs from Genetics
#1,859
of 7,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,589
of 313,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics
#34
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,786,078 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,828 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 313,417 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 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 53% of its contemporaries.