↓ Skip to main content

Ubiquitin–Proteasome-Dependent Regulation of Bidirectional Communication between Plastids and the Nucleus

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Ubiquitin–Proteasome-Dependent Regulation of Bidirectional Communication between Plastids and the Nucleus
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2017.00310
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoshihiro Hirosawa, Yasuko Ito-Inaba, Takehito Inaba

Abstract

Plastids are DNA-containing organelles and can have unique differentiation states depending on age, tissue, and environment. Plastid biogenesis is optimized by bidirectional communication between plastids and the nucleus. Import of nuclear-encoded proteins into plastids serves as anterograde signals and vice versa, plastids themselves send retrograde signals to the nucleus, thereby controlling de novo synthesis of nuclear-encoded plastid proteins. Recently, it has become increasingly evident that the ubiquitin-proteasome system regulates both the import of anterograde plastid proteins and retrograde signaling from plastids to the nucleus. Targets of ubiquitin-proteasome regulation include unimported chloroplast precursor proteins in the cytosol, protein translocation machinery at the chloroplast surface, and transcription factors in the nucleus. This review will focus on the mechanism through which the ubiquitin-proteasome system optimizes plastid biogenesis and plant development through the regulation of nuclear-plastid interactions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 36%
Student > Master 7 19%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Lecturer 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 39%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Chemistry 1 3%
Unknown 4 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 12 May 2017.
All research outputs
#7,469,706
of 25,836,587 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#4,331
of 24,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,377
of 323,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#107
of 543 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,836,587 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,941 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 323,372 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 543 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.