↓ Skip to main content

Modeling Protein Evolution with Several Amino Acid Replacement Matrices Depending on Site Rates

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Biology and Evolution, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
2 patents

Readers on

mendeley
180 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
Modeling Protein Evolution with Several Amino Acid Replacement Matrices Depending on Site Rates
Published in
Molecular Biology and Evolution, April 2012
DOI 10.1093/molbev/mss112
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Most protein substitution models use a single amino acid replacement matrix summarizing the biochemical properties of amino acids. However, site evolution is highly heterogeneous and depends on many factors that influence the substitution patterns. In this paper, we investigate the use of different substitution matrices for different site evolutionary rates. Indeed, the variability of evolutionary rates corresponds to one of the most apparent heterogeneity factors among sites, and there is no reason to assume that the substitution patterns remain identical regardless of the evolutionary rate. We first introduce LG4M, which is composed of four matrices, each corresponding to one discrete gamma rate category (of four). These matrices differ in their amino acid equilibrium distributions and in their exchangeabilities, contrary to the standard gamma model where only the global rate differs from one category to another. Next, we present LG4X, which also uses four different matrices, but leaves aside the gamma distribution and follows a distribution-free scheme for the site rates. All these matrices are estimated from a very large alignment database, and our two models are tested using a large sample of independent alignments. Detailed analysis of resulting matrices and models shows the complexity of amino acid substitutions and the advantage of flexible models such as LG4M and LG4X. Both significantly outperform single-matrix models, providing gains of dozens to hundreds of log-likelihood units for most data sets. LG4X obtains substantial gains compared with LG4M, thanks to its distribution-free scheme for site rates. Since LG4M and LG4X display such advantages but require the same memory space and have comparable running times to standard models, we believe that LG4M and LG4X are relevant alternatives to single replacement matrices. Our models, data, and software are available from http://www.atgc-montpellier.fr/models/lg4x.

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 4 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 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 7 4%
Canada 3 2%
Sweden 2 1%
France 2 1%
Australia 2 1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 157 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 26%
Researcher 34 19%
Student > Master 17 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 7%
Professor 12 7%
Other 24 13%
Unknown 34 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 85 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 33 18%
Computer Science 9 5%
Chemistry 3 2%
Chemical Engineering 2 1%
Other 9 5%
Unknown 39 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 16 June 2026.
All research outputs
#9,653,433
of 32,994,287 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Biology and Evolution
#3,353
of 6,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,170
of 202,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Biology and Evolution
#17
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,994,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,117 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 202,028 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 56% of its contemporaries.