↓ Skip to main content

Conservation analysis of long non-coding RNAs in plants

Overview of attention for article published in Science China Life Sciences, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Conservation analysis of long non-coding RNAs in plants
Published in
Science China Life Sciences, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11427-017-9174-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pingchuan Deng, Shu Liu, Xiaojun Nie, Song Weining, Liang Wu

Abstract

Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are gene regulators that have vital roles in development and adaptation to the environment in eukaryotes. However, the structural and evolutionary analyses of plant lncRNAs are limited. In this study, we performed an analysis of lncRNAs in five monocot and five dicot species. Our results showed that plant lncRNA genes were generally shorter and had fewer exons than protein-coding genes. The numbers of lncRNAs were positively correlated with the numbers of protein-coding genes in different plant species, despite a high range of variation. Sequence conservation analysis showed that the majority of lncRNAs had high sequence conservation at the intra-species and sub-species levels, reminiscent of protein-coding genes. At the inter-species level, a subset of lncRNAs were highly diverged at the nucleotide level, but conserved by position. Interestingly, we found that plant lncRNAs have identical splicing signals, and those which can form precursors or targets of miRNAs have a conservative identity in different species. We also revealed that most of the lowly expressed lncRNAs were tissue-specific, while those highly conserved were constitutively transcribed. Meanwhile, we characterized a subset of rice lncRNAs that were co-expressed with their adjacent protein-coding genes, suggesting they may play cis-regulatory roles. These results will contribute to understanding the biological significance and evolution of lncRNAs in plants.

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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 32%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Master 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 29 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 18%
Computer Science 3 3%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Decision Sciences 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 35 33%
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 05 November 2017.
All research outputs
#17,919,066
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Science China Life Sciences
#564
of 1,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,364
of 328,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science China Life Sciences
#20
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 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 1,009 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 328,927 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.