↓ Skip to main content

Repeated, Selection-Driven Genome Reduction of Accessory Genes in Experimental Populations

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Genetics, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
170 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Repeated, Selection-Driven Genome Reduction of Accessory Genes in Experimental Populations
Published in
PLoS Genetics, May 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002651
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Genome reduction has been observed in many bacterial lineages that have adapted to specialized environments. The extreme genome degradation seen for obligate pathogens and symbionts appears to be dominated by genetic drift. In contrast, for free-living organisms with reduced genomes, the dominant force is proposed to be direct selection for smaller, streamlined genomes. Most variation in gene content for these free-living species is of "accessory" genes, which are commonly gained as large chromosomal islands that are adaptive for specialized traits such as pathogenicity. It is generally unclear, however, whether the process of accessory gene loss is largely driven by drift or selection. Here we demonstrate that selection for gene loss, and not a shortened genome, per se, drove massive, rapid reduction of accessory genes. In just 1,500 generations of experimental evolution, 80% of populations of Methylobacterium extorquens AM1 experienced nearly parallel deletions removing up to 10% of the genome from a megaplasmid present in this strain. The absence of these deletion events in a mutation accumulation experiment suggested that selection, rather than drift, has dominated the process. Reconstructing these deletions confirmed that they were beneficial in their selective regimes, but led to decreased performance in alternative environments. These results indicate that selection can be crucial in eliminating unnecessary genes during the early stages of adaptation to a specialized 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.
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 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 170 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 %
United States 8 5%
France 2 1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 154 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 52 31%
Researcher 33 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 9%
Student > Master 16 9%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 15 9%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 97 57%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 32 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 5%
Environmental Science 4 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 2%
Other 7 4%
Unknown 18 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 30 June 2012.
All research outputs
#2,910,808
of 28,840,878 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Genetics
#2,038
of 9,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,780
of 184,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Genetics
#25
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,840,878 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,245 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 184,360 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.