↓ Skip to main content

Regulatory network features in Listeria monocytogenes—changing the way we talk

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Regulatory network features in Listeria monocytogenes—changing the way we talk
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fcimb.2014.00014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Veronica Guariglia-Oropeza, Renato H. Orsi, Haiyuan Yu, Kathryn J. Boor, Martin Wiedmann, Claudia Guldimann

Abstract

Our understanding of how pathogens shape their gene expression profiles in response to environmental changes is ever growing. Advances in Bioinformatics have made it possible to model complex systems and integrate data from variable sources into one large regulatory network. In these analyses, regulatory networks are typically broken down into regulatory motifs such as feed-forward loops (FFL) or auto-regulatory feedbacks, which serves to simplify the structure, while the functional implications of different regulatory motifs allow to make informed assumptions about the function of a specific regulatory pathway. Here we review the basic concepts of network features and use this language to break down the regulatory networks that govern the interactions between the main regulators of stress response, virulence, and transmission in Listeria monocytogenes. We point out the advantage that taking a "systems approach" could have for our understanding of gene functions, the detection of distant regulatory inputs, interspecies comparisons, and co-expression.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 68 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 17%
Researcher 12 17%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Professor 5 7%
Other 18 26%
Unknown 8 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 15 21%
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 11 March 2014.
All research outputs
#15,293,290
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#3,496
of 6,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,967
of 305,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#15
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 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 6,336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 305,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.