↓ Skip to main content

Systematic humanization of yeast genes reveals conserved functions and genetic modularity

Overview of attention for article published in Science, 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 (96th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
114 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
456 Mendeley
citeulike
8 CiteULike
Title
Systematic humanization of yeast genes reveals conserved functions and genetic modularity
Published in
Science, May 2015
DOI 10.1126/science.aaa0769
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. H. Kachroo, J. M. Laurent, C. M. Yellman, A. G. Meyer, C. O. Wilke, E. M. Marcotte

Abstract

To determine whether genes retain ancestral functions over a billion years of evolution and to identify principles of deep evolutionary divergence, we replaced 414 essential yeast genes with their human orthologs, assaying for complementation of lethal growth defects upon loss of the yeast genes. Nearly half (47%) of the yeast genes could be successfully humanized. Sequence similarity and expression only partly predicted replaceability. Instead, replaceability depended strongly on gene modules: Genes in the same process tended to be similarly replaceable (e.g., sterol biosynthesis) or not (e.g., DNA replication initiation). Simulations confirmed that selection for specific function can maintain replaceability despite extensive sequence divergence. Critical ancestral functions of many essential genes are thus retained in a pathway-specific manner, resilient to drift in sequences, splicing, and protein interfaces.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 249 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 456 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 15 3%
United Kingdom 6 1%
Canada 3 <1%
Korea, Republic of 2 <1%
Russia 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 10 2%
Unknown 411 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 136 30%
Researcher 101 22%
Student > Bachelor 46 10%
Student > Master 44 10%
Professor 29 6%
Other 100 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 241 53%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 124 27%
Unspecified 32 7%
Chemistry 14 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 2%
Other 36 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 358. 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 05 October 2018.
All research outputs
#27,214
of 12,520,457 outputs
Outputs from Science
#1,212
of 58,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#592
of 232,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#37
of 1,187 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,520,457 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 58,965 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 232,497 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 1,187 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 96% of its contemporaries.