↓ Skip to main content

How does evolution tune biological noise?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
120 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
How does evolution tune biological noise?
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2014.00374
Pubmed ID
Authors

Magali Richard, Gaël Yvert

Abstract

Part of molecular and phenotypic differences between individual cells, between body parts, or between individuals can result from biological noise. This source of variation is becoming more and more apparent thanks to the recent advances in dynamic imaging and single-cell analysis. Some of these studies showed that the link between genotype and phenotype is not strictly deterministic. Mutations can change various statistical properties of a biochemical reaction, and thereby the probability of a trait outcome. The fact that they can modulate phenotypic noise brings up an intriguing question: how may selection act on these mutations? In this review, we approach this question by first covering the evidence that biological noise is under genetic control and therefore a substrate for evolution. We then sequentially inspect the possibilities of negative, neutral, and positive selection for mutations increasing biological noise. Finally, we hypothesize on the specific case of H2A.Z, which was shown to both buffer phenotypic noise and modulate transcriptional efficiency.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 3%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Unknown 112 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 25%
Researcher 24 20%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 13 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 34 28%
Engineering 7 6%
Computer Science 4 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 17 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 May 2018.
All research outputs
#6,943,417
of 22,768,097 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#2,151
of 11,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,253
of 260,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#32
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,768,097 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,758 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 260,385 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.