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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The CAF1-NOT complex of trypanosomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fgene.2013.00299 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Esteban Erben, Chaitali Chakraborty, Christine Clayton |
| Abstract |
In African trypanosomes, there is no control of transcription initiation by RNA polymerase II at the level of individual protein-coding genes. Transcription is polycistronic, and individual mRNAs are excised by trans-splicing and polyadenylation. As a consequence, trypanosomes are uniquely reliant on post-transcriptional mechanisms for control of gene expression. Rates of mRNA decay vary over up to two orders of magnitude, making these organisms an excellent model system for the study of mRNA degradation processes. The trypanosome CAF1-NOT complex is simpler than that of other organisms, with no CCR4 or NOT4 homolog: it consists of CAF1, NOT1, NOT2, NOT5 NOT9, NOT10, and NOT11. It is important for the initiation of degradation of most, although not all, mRNAs. There is no homolog of NOT4, and Tho and TREX complexes are absent. Functions of the trypanosome NOT complex are therefore likely to be restricted mainly to deadenylation. Mechanisms that cause the NOT complex to deadenylate some mRNAs faster than others must exist, but have not yet been described. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| France | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 19% |
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Professor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 20 | 38% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 35% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 11 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 January 2014.
All research outputs
#14,186,260
of 22,738,543 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#3,906
of 11,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,612
of 305,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#32
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,738,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,757 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 305,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.