↓ Skip to main content

The evolution of early cellular systems viewed through the lens of biological interactions

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
The evolution of early cellular systems viewed through the lens of biological interactions
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01144
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anthony M. Poole, Daniel Lundin, Kalle T. Rytkönen

Abstract

The minimal cell concept represents a pragmatic approach to the question of how few genes are required to run a cell. This is a helpful way to build a parts-list, and has been more successful than attempts to deduce a minimal gene set for life by inferring the gene repertoire of the last universal common ancestor, as few genes trace back to this hypothetical ancestral state. However, the study of minimal cellular systems is the study of biological outliers where, by practical necessity, coevolutionary interactions are minimized or ignored. In this paper, we consider the biological context from which minimal genomes have been removed. For instance, some of the most reduced genomes are from endosymbionts and are the result of coevolutionary interactions with a host; few such organisms are "free-living." As few, if any, biological systems exist in complete isolation, we expect that, as with modern life, early biological systems were part of an ecosystem, replete with organismal interactions. We favor refocusing discussions of the evolution of cellular systems on processes rather than gene counts. We therefore draw a distinction between a pragmatic minimal cell (an interesting engineering problem), a distributed genome (a system resulting from an evolutionary transition involving more than one cell) and the looser coevolutionary interactions that are ubiquitous in ecosystems. Finally, we consider the distributed genome and coevolutionary interactions between genomic entities in the context of early evolution.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 29 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 19%
Student > Master 4 13%
Professor 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 8 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Chemistry 2 6%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 26%
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 19 October 2015.
All research outputs
#20,294,248
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,401
of 24,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,871
of 283,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#359
of 446 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,801 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 283,771 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 446 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.