↓ Skip to main content

Bovine ncRNAs Are Abundant, Primarily Intergenic, Conserved and Associated with Regulatory Genes

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
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
Bovine ncRNAs Are Abundant, Primarily Intergenic, Conserved and Associated with Regulatory Genes
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0042638
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhipeng Qu, David L. Adelson

Abstract

It is apparent that non-coding transcripts are a common feature of higher organisms and encode uncharacterized layers of genetic regulation and information. We used public bovine EST data from many developmental stages and tissues, and developed a pipeline for the genome wide identification and annotation of non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs). We have predicted 23,060 bovine ncRNAs, 99% of which are un-annotated, based on known ncRNA databases. Intergenic transcripts accounted for the majority (57%) of the predicted ncRNAs and the occurrence of ncRNAs and genes were only moderately correlated (r = 0.55, p-value<2.2e-16). Many of these intergenic non-coding RNAs mapped close to the 3' or 5' end of thousands of genes and many of these were transcribed from the opposite strand with respect to the closest gene, particularly regulatory-related genes. Conservation analyses showed that these ncRNAs were evolutionarily conserved, and many intergenic ncRNAs proximate to genes contained sequence-specific motifs. Correlation analysis of expression between these intergenic ncRNAs and protein-coding genes using RNA-seq data from a variety of tissues showed significant correlations with many transcripts. These results support the hypothesis that ncRNAs are common, transcribed in a regulated fashion and have regulatory functions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 6%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 33 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 28%
Student > Bachelor 6 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 56%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 19%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 5 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 August 2012.
All research outputs
#15,248,503
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#129,827
of 193,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,855
of 166,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,683
of 4,129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 166,280 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.