A Bacterium That Can Grow by Using Arsenic Instead of Phosphorus

Overview of attention for article published in Science, June 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#49 of 33,431)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
1820 Mendeley
citeulike
45 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
A Bacterium That Can Grow by Using Arsenic Instead of Phosphorus
Published in
Science, June 2011
DOI 10.1126/science.1197258
Pubmed ID
Authors

Felisa Wolfe-Simon, Jodi Switzer Blum, Thomas R Kulp, Gwyneth W Gordon, Shelley E Hoeft, Jennifer Pett-Ridge, John F Stolz, Samuel M Webb, Peter K Weber, Paul C W Davies, Ariel D Anbar, Ronald S Oremland, Wolfe-Simon F, Switzer Blum J, Kulp TR, Gordon GW, Hoeft SE, Pett-Ridge J, Stolz JF, Webb SM, Weber PK, Davies PC, Anbar AD, Oremland RS, Thomas R. Kulp, Gwyneth W. Gordon, Shelley E. Hoeft, John F. Stolz, Samuel M. Webb, Peter K. Weber, Paul C. W. Davies, Ariel D. Anbar, Ronald S. Oremland

Abstract

Life is mostly composed of the elements carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, sulfur, and phosphorus. Although these six elements make up nucleic acids, proteins, and lipids and thus the bulk of living matter, it is theoretically possible that some other elements in the periodic table could serve the same functions. Here, we describe a bacterium, strain GFAJ-1 of the Halomonadaceae, isolated from Mono Lake, California, that is able to substitute arsenic for phosphorus to sustain its growth. Our data show evidence for arsenate in macromolecules that normally contain phosphate, most notably nucleic acids and proteins. Exchange of one of the major bio-elements may have profound evolutionary and geochemical importance.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,820 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 12 1%
United Kingdom 3 0%
India 2 0%
Switzerland 2 0%
Germany 2 0%
China 1 0%
Japan 1 0%
Netherlands 1 0%
Chile 1 0%
Other 4 0%
Unknown 1791 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 55 3%
Student > Ph. D. Student 52 3%
Student > Master 24 1%
Student > Bachelor 17 1%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 1%
Other 35 2%
Unknown 1624 89%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 129 7%
Environmental Science 13 1%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 11 1%
Chemistry 10 1%
Physics and Astronomy 6 0%
Other 27 1%
Unknown 1624 89%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1035. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2016.
All research outputs
#756
of 5,402,432 outputs
Outputs from Science
#49
of 33,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#749
of 4,432,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#49
of 30,294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,402,432 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,431 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 4,432,323 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30,294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.