↓ Skip to main content

Directed evolution of cell size in Escherichia coli

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Evolutionary Biology, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 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
Directed evolution of cell size in Escherichia coli
Published in
BMC Evolutionary Biology, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12862-014-0257-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mari Yoshida, Saburo Tsuru, Naoko Hirata, Shigeto Seno, Hideo Matsuda, Bei-Wen Ying, Tetsuya Yomo

Abstract

BackgroundIn bacteria, cell size affects chromosome replication, the assembly of division machinery, cell wall synthesis, membrane synthesis and ultimately growth rate. In addition, cell size can also be a target for Darwinian evolution for protection from predators. This strong coupling of cell size and growth, however, could lead to the introduction of growth defects after size evolution. An important question remains: can bacterial cell size change and/or evolve without imposing a growth burden?ResultsThe directed evolution of particular cell sizes, without a growth burden, was tested with a laboratory Escherichia coli strain. Cells of defined size ranges were collected by a cell sorter and were subsequently cultured. This selection-propagation cycle was repeated, and significant changes in cell size were detected within 400 generations. In addition, the width of the size distribution was altered. The changes in cell size were unaccompanied by a growth burden. Whole genome sequencing revealed that only a few mutations in genes related to membrane synthesis conferred the size evolution.ConclusionsIn conclusion, bacterial cell size could evolve, through a few mutations, without growth reduction. The size evolution without growth reduction suggests a rapid evolutionary change to diverse cell sizes in bacterial survival strategies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
India 1 1%
Colombia 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 77 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 30%
Researcher 17 21%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Master 7 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 7 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 23%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 5%
Physics and Astronomy 3 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 8 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 December 2014.
All research outputs
#12,714,651
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from BMC Evolutionary Biology
#1,892
of 2,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,837
of 331,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Evolutionary Biology
#43
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,910 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 331,266 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.