↓ Skip to main content

Accurate Quantification of Functional Analogy among Close Homologs

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, February 2011
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 (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Accurate Quantification of Functional Analogy among Close Homologs
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, February 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001074
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria D. Chikina, Olga G. Troyanskaya

Abstract

Correctly evaluating functional similarities among homologous proteins is necessary for accurate transfer of experimental knowledge from one organism to another, and is of particular importance for the development of animal models of human disease. While the fact that sequence similarity implies functional similarity is a fundamental paradigm of molecular biology, sequence comparison does not directly assess the extent to which two proteins participate in the same biological processes, and has limited utility for analyzing families with several parologous members. Nevertheless, we show that it is possible to provide a cross-organism functional similarity measure in an unbiased way through the exclusive use of high-throughput gene-expression data. Our methodology is based on probabilistic cross-species mapping of functionally analogous proteins based on Bayesian integrative analysis of gene expression compendia. We demonstrate that even among closely related genes, our method is able to predict functionally analogous homolog pairs better than relying on sequence comparison alone. We also demonstrate that the landscape of functional similarity is often complex and that definitive "functional orthologs" do not always exist. Even in these cases, our method and the online interface we provide are designed to allow detailed exploration of sources of inferred functional similarity that can be evaluated by the user.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 11%
Brazil 2 3%
Belgium 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 59 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 34%
Professor 6 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Other 4 6%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 2 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 41 58%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 18%
Computer Science 9 13%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Mathematics 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 3 4%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 23 September 2011.
All research outputs
#3,561,299
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#3,090
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,389
of 193,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#16
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 193,347 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.