↓ Skip to main content

Complex archaea that bridge the gap between prokaryotes and eukaryotes

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
1018 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2380 Mendeley
citeulike
11 CiteULike
Title
Complex archaea that bridge the gap between prokaryotes and eukaryotes
Published in
Nature, May 2015
DOI 10.1038/nature14447
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anja Spang, Jimmy H. Saw, Steffen L. Jørgensen, Katarzyna Zaremba-Niedzwiedzka, Joran Martijn, Anders E. Lind, Roel van Eijk, Christa Schleper, Lionel Guy, Thijs J. G. Ettema

Abstract

The origin of the eukaryotic cell remains one of the most contentious puzzles in modern biology. Recent studies have provided support for the emergence of the eukaryotic host cell from within the archaeal domain of life, but the identity and nature of the putative archaeal ancestor remain a subject of debate. Here we describe the discovery of 'Lokiarchaeota', a novel candidate archaeal phylum, which forms a monophyletic group with eukaryotes in phylogenomic analyses, and whose genomes encode an expanded repertoire of eukaryotic signature proteins that are suggestive of sophisticated membrane remodelling capabilities. Our results provide strong support for hypotheses in which the eukaryotic host evolved from a bona fide archaeon, and demonstrate that many components that underpin eukaryote-specific features were already present in that ancestor. This provided the host with a rich genomic 'starter-kit' to support the increase in the cellular and genomic complexity that is characteristic of eukaryotes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 618 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 2,380 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 45 2%
Germany 15 <1%
France 11 <1%
Brazil 11 <1%
United Kingdom 10 <1%
Spain 7 <1%
Canada 6 <1%
Czechia 6 <1%
Chile 5 <1%
Other 48 2%
Unknown 2216 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 498 21%
Researcher 402 17%
Student > Bachelor 343 14%
Student > Master 295 12%
Professor 104 4%
Other 372 16%
Unknown 366 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 905 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 544 23%
Environmental Science 120 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 93 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 88 4%
Other 199 8%
Unknown 431 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1111. 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 13 February 2024.
All research outputs
#13,647
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#1,389
of 98,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85
of 279,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#15
of 1,022 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 98,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 279,531 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,022 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 98% of its contemporaries.