↓ Skip to main content

mRNA Decay

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'mRNA Decay'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 5′-Bromouridine IP Chase (BRIC)-Seq to Determine RNA Half-Lives
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 Determining mRNA Decay Rates Using RNA Approach to Equilibrium Sequencing (RATE-Seq)
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 Metabolic Labeling of Newly Synthesized RNA with 4sU to in Parallel Assess RNA Transcription and Decay
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 Measuring mRNA Decay in Budding Yeast Using Single Molecule FISH
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 PAR-CLIP for Discovering Target Sites of RNA-Binding Proteins
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Characterizing mRNA Sequence Motifs in the 3′-UTR Using GFP Reporter Constructs
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 iCLIP of the PIWI Protein Aubergine in Drosophila Embryos
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Integration of ENCODE RNAseq and eCLIP Data Sets
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Identifying miRNA Targets Using AGO-RIPseq
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 Integrated Analysis of miRNA and mRNA Expression Profiles to Identify miRNA Targets
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Identifying RISC Components Using Ago2 Immunoprecipitation and Mass Spectrometry
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 Using Tet-Off Cells and RNAi Knockdown to Assay mRNA Decay
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 Identifying Cellular Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay (NMD) Targets: Immunoprecipitation of Phosphorylated UPF1 Followed by RNA Sequencing (p-UPF1 RIP−Seq)
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 Generation of Cell Lines Stably Expressing a Fluorescent Reporter of Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay Activity
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 Reactivation Assay to Identify Direct Targets of the Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay Pathway in Drosophila
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 Studying Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay in Mammalian Cells Using a Multicolored Bioluminescence-Based Reporter System
Attention for Chapter 15: Reactivation Assay to Identify Direct Targets of the Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay Pathway in Drosophila
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
4 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.
Chapter title
Reactivation Assay to Identify Direct Targets of the Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay Pathway in Drosophila
Chapter number 15
Book title
Methods in Molecular Biology
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-7540-2_15
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-7539-6, 978-1-4939-7540-2
Authors

Nelson, Jonathan O., Metzstein, Mark M., Jonathan O. Nelson, Mark M. Metzstein

Abstract

Transcriptome analysis provides a snapshot of cellular gene expression and is used to determine how cells and organisms respond to genetic or environmental changes. Identifying the transcripts whose expression levels are regulated directly by the manipulation being examined from those whose expression changes as a secondary cause from the primary changes requires additional analyses. Here we present a technique used to distinguish direct targets of the nonsense-mediated mRNA decay (NMD) pathway in Drosophila from secondary gene expression effects caused by loss of this pathway. This technique uses pulsed reexpression of an essential NMD gene in Drosophila lacking this NMD factor, followed by analysis of the transcriptome over time. In this way, RNAs with a rapid reduction in expression upon reactivation of NMD activity, corresponding to primary NMD targets, can be identified. This technique could potentially be modified to identify direct targets of other mRNA decay mechanisms in Drosophila or other organisms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 1 25%
Unknown 3 75%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 25%
Unknown 3 75%
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 14 December 2017.
All research outputs
#15,485,255
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#5,388
of 13,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#266,638
of 439,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#610
of 1,523 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,157 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 439,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,523 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.