↓ Skip to main content

Big Genomes Facilitate the Comparative Identification of Regulatory Elements

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2009
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
citeulike
14 CiteULike
connotea
2 Connotea
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
Big Genomes Facilitate the Comparative Identification of Regulatory Elements
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2009
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0004688
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brant K. Peterson, Emily E. Hare, Venky N. Iyer, Steven Storage, Laura Conner, Daniel R. Papaj, Rick Kurashima, Eric Jang, Michael B. Eisen

Abstract

The identification of regulatory sequences in animal genomes remains a significant challenge. Comparative genomic methods that use patterns of evolutionary conservation to identify non-coding sequences with regulatory function have yielded many new vertebrate enhancers. However, these methods have not contributed significantly to the identification of regulatory sequences in sequenced invertebrate taxa. We demonstrate here that this differential success, which is often attributed to fundamental differences in the nature of vertebrate and invertebrate regulatory sequences, is instead primarily a product of the relatively small size of sequenced invertebrate genomes. We sequenced and compared loci involved in early embryonic patterning from four species of true fruit flies (family Tephritidae) that have genomes four to six times larger than those of Drosophila melanogaster. Unlike in Drosophila, where virtually all non-coding DNA is highly conserved, blocks of conserved non-coding sequence in tephritids are flanked by large stretches of poorly conserved sequence, similar to what is observed in vertebrate genomes. We tested the activities of nine conserved non-coding sequences flanking the even-skipped gene of the teprhitid Ceratis capitata in transgenic D. melanogaster embryos, six of which drove patterns that recapitulate those of known D. melanogaster enhancers. In contrast, none of the three non-conserved tephritid non-coding sequences that we tested drove expression in D. melanogaster embryos. Based on the landscape of non-coding conservation in tephritids, and our initial success in using conservation in tephritids to identify D. melanogaster regulatory sequences, we suggest that comparison of tephritid genomes may provide a systematic means to annotate the non-coding portion of the D. melanogaster genome. We also propose that large genomes be given more consideration in the selection of species for comparative genomics projects, to provide increased power to detect functional non-coding DNAs and to provide a less biased view of the evolution and function of animal genomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 5%
United Kingdom 3 3%
Germany 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Saudi Arabia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 97 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 40 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 26%
Professor > Associate Professor 13 11%
Professor 8 7%
Student > Master 5 4%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 8 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 90 78%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 11%
Computer Science 2 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 <1%
Materials Science 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 09 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,298,861
of 24,664,952 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#28,346
of 213,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,029
of 99,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#97
of 518 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,664,952 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 213,272 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 99,733 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 518 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.