↓ Skip to main content

Modeling HIV-1 Drug Resistance as Episodic Directional Selection

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, May 2012
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
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
citeulike
4 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
Modeling HIV-1 Drug Resistance as Episodic Directional Selection
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, May 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002507
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ben Murrell, Tulio de Oliveira, Chris Seebregts, Sergei L. Kosakovsky Pond, Konrad Scheffler

Abstract

The evolution of substitutions conferring drug resistance to HIV-1 is both episodic, occurring when patients are on antiretroviral therapy, and strongly directional, with site-specific resistant residues increasing in frequency over time. While methods exist to detect episodic diversifying selection and continuous directional selection, no evolutionary model combining these two properties has been proposed. We present two models of episodic directional selection (MEDS and EDEPS) which allow the a priori specification of lineages expected to have undergone directional selection. The models infer the sites and target residues that were likely subject to directional selection, using either codon or protein sequences. Compared to its null model of episodic diversifying selection, MEDS provides a superior fit to most sites known to be involved in drug resistance, and neither one test for episodic diversifying selection nor another for constant directional selection are able to detect as many true positives as MEDS and EDEPS while maintaining acceptable levels of false positives. This suggests that episodic directional selection is a better description of the process driving the evolution of drug resistance.

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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
France 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Taiwan 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 50 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 19%
Researcher 11 19%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Master 6 11%
Professor 5 9%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 42%
Computer Science 6 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 7%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 6 11%
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 28 May 2012.
All research outputs
#8,544,090
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#5,639
of 8,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,577
of 176,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#53
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 176,194 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.