↓ Skip to main content

In Vitro Secondary Structure of the Genomic RNA of Satellite Tobacco Mosaic Virus

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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.
Title
In Vitro Secondary Structure of the Genomic RNA of Satellite Tobacco Mosaic Virus
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0054384
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shreyas S. Athavale, J. Jared Gossett, Jessica C. Bowman, Nicholas V. Hud, Loren Dean Williams, Stephen C. Harvey

Abstract

Satellite tobacco mosaic virus (STMV) is a T = 1 icosahedral virus with a single-stranded RNA genome. It is widely accepted that the RNA genome plays an important structural role during assembly of the STMV virion. While the encapsidated form of the RNA has been extensively studied, less is known about the structure of the free RNA, aside from a purported tRNA-like structure at the 3' end. Here we use selective 2'-hydroxyl acylation analyzed by primer extension (SHAPE) analysis to examine the secondary structure of in vitro transcribed STMV RNA. The predicted secondary structure is unusual in the sense that it is highly extended, which could be significant for protecting the RNA from degradation. The SHAPE data are also consistent with the previously predicted tRNA-like fold at the 3' end of the molecule, which is also known to hinder degradation. Our data are not consistent with the secondary structure proposed for the encapsidated RNA by Schroeder et al., suggesting that, if the Schroeder structure is correct, either the RNA is packaged as it emerges from the replication complex, or the RNA undergoes extensive refolding upon encapsidation. We also consider the alternative, i.e., that the structure of the encapsidated STMV RNA might be the same as the in vitro structure presented here, and we examine how this structure might be organized in the virus. This possibility is not rigorously ruled out by the available data, so it remains open to examination by experiment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Israel 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 53 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 35%
Researcher 14 25%
Student > Master 6 11%
Professor 5 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 2 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 25%
Chemistry 7 12%
Physics and Astronomy 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 3 5%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 June 2015.
All research outputs
#17,676,164
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#146,416
of 193,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,036
of 279,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,503
of 5,005 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,724 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 279,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,005 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.