↓ Skip to main content

Domestication of self-splicing introns during eukaryogenesis: the rise of the complex spliceosomal machinery

Overview of attention for article published in Biology Direct, December 2017
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
19 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Domestication of self-splicing introns during eukaryogenesis: the rise of the complex spliceosomal machinery
Published in
Biology Direct, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13062-017-0201-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julian Vosseberg, Berend Snel

Abstract

ᅟ: The spliceosome is a eukaryote-specific complex that is essential for the removal of introns from pre-mRNA. It consists of five small nuclear RNAs (snRNAs) and over a hundred proteins, making it one of the most complex molecular machineries. Most of this complexity has emerged during eukaryogenesis, a period that is characterised by a drastic increase in cellular and genomic complexity. Although not fully resolved, recent findings have started to shed some light on how and why the spliceosome originated. In this paper we review how the spliceosome has evolved and discuss its origin and subsequent evolution in light of different general hypotheses on the evolution of complexity. Comparative analyses have established that the catalytic core of this ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complex, as well as the spliceosomal introns, evolved from self-splicing group II introns. Most snRNAs evolved from intron fragments and the essential Prp8 protein originated from the protein that is encoded by group II introns. Proteins that functioned in other RNA processes were added to this core and extensive duplications of these proteins substantially increased the complexity of the spliceosome prior to the eukaryotic diversification. The splicing machinery became even more complex in animals and plants, yet was simplified in eukaryotes with streamlined genomes. Apparently, the spliceosome did not evolve its complexity gradually, but in rapid bursts, followed by stagnation or even simplification. We argue that although both adaptive and neutral evolution have been involved in the evolution of the spliceosome, especially the latter was responsible for the emergence of an enormously complex eukaryotic splicing machinery from simple self-splicing sequences. This article was reviewed by W. Ford Doolittle, Eugene V. Koonin and Vivek Anantharaman.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 24%
Student > Bachelor 8 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Master 5 11%
Other 3 7%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 35%
Unspecified 2 4%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 6 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 17 December 2017.
All research outputs
#948,800
of 13,402,263 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#58
of 566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,338
of 388,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#3
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,402,263 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 388,139 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 89% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.