↓ Skip to main content

Large Direct Repeats Flank Genomic Rearrangements between a New Clinical Isolate of Francisella tularensis subsp. tularensis A1 and Schu S4

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Large Direct Repeats Flank Genomic Rearrangements between a New Clinical Isolate of Francisella tularensis subsp. tularensis A1 and Schu S4
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2010
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0009007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ufuk Nalbantoglu, Khalid Sayood, Michael P. Dempsey, Peter C. Iwen, Stephen C. Francesconi, Ravi D. Barabote, Gary Xie, Thomas S. Brettin, Steven H. Hinrichs, Paul D. Fey

Abstract

Francisella tularensis subspecies tularensis consists of two separate populations A1 and A2. This report describes the complete genome sequence of NE061598, an F. tularensis subspecies tularensis A1 isolated in 1998 from a human with clinical disease in Nebraska, United States of America. The genome sequence was compared to Schu S4, an F. tularensis subspecies tularensis A1a strain originally isolated in Ohio in 1941. It was determined that there were 25 nucleotide polymorphisms (22 SNPs and 3 indels) between Schu S4 and NE061598; two of these polymorphisms were in potential virulence loci. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis analysis demonstrated that NE061598 was an A1a genotype. Other differences included repeat sequences (n = 11 separate loci), four of which were contained in coding sequences, and an inversion and rearrangement probably mediated by insertion sequences and the previously identified direct repeats I, II, and III. Five new variable-number tandem repeats were identified; three of these five were unique in NE061598 compared to Schu S4. Importantly, there was no gene loss or gain identified between NE061598 and Schu S4. Interpretation of these data suggests there is significant sequence conservation and chromosomal synteny within the A1 population. Further studies are needed to determine the biological properties driving the selective pressure that maintains the chromosomal structure of this monomorphic pathogen.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 2 9%
Sweden 1 4%
Unknown 20 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 22%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 22%
Student > Master 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 2 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 52%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 17%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 2 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 11 April 2010.
All research outputs
#5,846,991
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#70,215
of 193,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,723
of 165,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#283
of 631 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,897 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 165,079 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 631 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 54% of its contemporaries.