↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Fitness effects of altering gene expression noise in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Overview of attention for article published in eLife, August 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 (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
93 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
138 Mendeley
Title
Fitness effects of altering gene expression noise in Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Published in
eLife, August 2018
DOI 10.7554/elife.37272
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fabien Duveau, Andrea Hodgins-Davis, Brian PH Metzger, Bing Yang, Stephen Tryban, Elizabeth A Walker, Tricia Lybrook, Patricia J Wittkopp

Abstract

Gene expression noise is an evolvable property of biological systems that describes differences in expression among genetically identical cells in the same environment. Prior work has shown that expression noise is heritable and can be shaped by selection, but the impact of variation in expression noise on organismal fitness has proven difficult to measure. Here, we quantify the fitness effects of altering expression noise for the TDH3 gene in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We show that increases in expression noise can be deleterious or beneficial depending on the difference between the average expression level of a genotype and the expression level maximizing fitness. We also show that a simple model relating single-cell expression levels to population growth produces patterns consistent with our empirical data. We use this model to explore a broad range of average expression levels and expression noise, providing additional insight into the fitness effects of variation in expression noise.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 93 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 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 138 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 27%
Researcher 26 19%
Student > Master 22 16%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 16 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 54 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 28%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 4%
Physics and Astronomy 5 4%
Engineering 4 3%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 21 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 50. 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 01 September 2020.
All research outputs
#863,620
of 25,750,437 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#2,729
of 15,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,129
of 343,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#70
of 340 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,750,437 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 15,833 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 343,002 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 340 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.