↓ Skip to main content

Synchronous long-term oscillations in a synthetic gene circuit

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, October 2016
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 (97th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
102 tweeters
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
259 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
616 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.
Title
Synchronous long-term oscillations in a synthetic gene circuit
Published in
Nature, October 2016
DOI 10.1038/nature19841
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laurent Potvin-Trottier, Nathan D. Lord, Glenn Vinnicombe, Johan Paulsson

Abstract

Synthetically engineered genetic circuits can perform a wide variety of tasks but are generally less accurate than natural systems. Here we revisit the first synthetic genetic oscillator, the repressilator, and modify it using principles from stochastic chemistry in single cells. Specifically, we sought to reduce error propagation and information losses, not by adding control loops, but by simply removing existing features. We show that this modification created highly regular and robust oscillations. Furthermore, some streamlined circuits kept 14 generation periods over a range of growth conditions and kept phase for hundreds of generations in single cells, allowing cells in flasks and colonies to oscillate synchronously without any coupling between them. Our results suggest that even the simplest synthetic genetic networks can achieve a precision that rivals natural systems, and emphasize the importance of noise analyses for circuit design in synthetic biology.

Twitter Demographics

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 102 tweeters 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 616 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 605 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 169 27%
Student > Bachelor 93 15%
Researcher 82 13%
Student > Master 72 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 31 5%
Other 80 13%
Unknown 89 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 193 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 138 22%
Engineering 49 8%
Physics and Astronomy 39 6%
Chemistry 18 3%
Other 84 14%
Unknown 95 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 113. 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 14 October 2022.
All research outputs
#351,898
of 24,525,936 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#18,223
of 95,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,977
of 325,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#394
of 1,022 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,525,936 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 95,289 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 101.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 325,267 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,022 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 61% of its contemporaries.