↓ Skip to main content

Frequent Gain and Loss of Functional Transcription Factor Binding Sites

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, May 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
138 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
182 Mendeley
citeulike
17 CiteULike
connotea
13 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
Frequent Gain and Loss of Functional Transcription Factor Binding Sites
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, May 2007
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030099
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scott W Doniger, Justin C Fay

Abstract

Cis-regulatory sequences are not always conserved across species. Divergence within cis-regulatory sequences may result from the evolution of species-specific patterns of gene expression or the flexible nature of the cis-regulatory code. The identification of functional divergence in cis-regulatory sequences is therefore important for both understanding the role of gene regulation in evolution and annotating regulatory elements. We have developed an evolutionary model to detect the loss of constraint on individual transcription factor binding sites (TFBSs). We find that a significant fraction of functionally constrained binding sites have been lost in a lineage-specific manner among three closely related yeast species. Binding site loss has previously been explained by turnover, where the concurrent gain and loss of a binding site maintains gene regulation. We estimate that nearly half of all loss events cannot be explained by binding site turnover. Recreating the mutations that led to binding site loss confirms that these sequence changes affect gene expression in some cases. We also estimate that there is a high rate of binding site gain, as more than half of experimentally identified S. cerevisiae binding sites are not conserved across species. The frequent gain and loss of TFBSs implies that cis-regulatory sequences are labile and, in the absence of turnover, may contribute to species-specific patterns of gene expression.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 182 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 14 8%
Netherlands 2 1%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 157 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 62 34%
Researcher 39 21%
Professor > Associate Professor 19 10%
Student > Master 14 8%
Student > Bachelor 10 5%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 10 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 118 65%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 34 19%
Computer Science 7 4%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Physics and Astronomy 3 2%
Other 6 3%
Unknown 11 6%
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 September 2012.
All research outputs
#21,011,157
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#8,282
of 9,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,522
of 84,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#31
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,043 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 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 84,044 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.