↓ Skip to main content

The impact of extremophiles on structural genomics (and vice versa)

Overview of attention for article published in Extremophiles, June 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
9 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
The impact of extremophiles on structural genomics (and vice versa)
Published in
Extremophiles, June 2007
DOI 10.1007/s00792-007-0087-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francis E. Jenney Jr, Michael W. W. Adams

Abstract

The advent of the complete genome sequences of various organisms in the mid-1990s raised the issue of how one could determine the function of hypothetical proteins. While insight might be obtained from a 3D structure, the chances of being able to predict such a structure is limited for the deduced amino acid sequence of any uncharacterized gene. A template for modeling is required, but there was only a low probability of finding a protein closely-related in sequence with an available structure. Thus, in the late 1990s, an international effort known as structural genomics (SG) was initiated, its primary goal to "fill sequence-structure space" by determining the 3D structures of representatives of all known protein families. This was to be achieved mainly by X-ray crystallography and it was estimated that at least 5,000 new structures would be required. While the proteins (genes) for SG have subsequently been derived from hundreds of different organisms, extremophiles and particularly thermophiles have been specifically targeted due to the increased stability and ease of handling of their proteins, relative to those from mesophiles. This review summarizes the significant impact that extremophiles and proteins derived from them have had on SG projects worldwide. To what extent SG has influenced the field of extremophile research is also discussed.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Switzerland 1 1%
Chile 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
India 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 71 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 19%
Researcher 13 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 11%
Professor 8 10%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 10 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 48%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 24%
Chemistry 4 5%
Computer Science 1 1%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 15 19%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 July 2023.
All research outputs
#7,454,298
of 22,789,076 outputs
Outputs from Extremophiles
#228
of 798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,832
of 70,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Extremophiles
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,789,076 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 798 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 70,159 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.