↓ Skip to main content

Genetic evidence for conserved non-coding element function across species–the ears have it

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Genetic evidence for conserved non-coding element function across species–the ears have it
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2014.00007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric E. Turner, Timothy C. Cox

Abstract

Comparison of genomic sequences from diverse vertebrate species has revealed numerous highly conserved regions that do not appear to encode proteins or functional RNAs. Often these "conserved non-coding elements," or CNEs, can direct gene expression to specific tissues in transgenic models, demonstrating they have regulatory function. CNEs are frequently found near "developmental" genes, particularly transcription factors, implying that these elements have essential regulatory roles in development. However, actual examples demonstrating CNE regulatory functions across species have been few, and recent loss-of-function studies of several CNEs in mice have shown relatively minor effects. In this Perspectives article, we discuss new findings in "fancy" rats and Highland cattle demonstrating that function of a CNE near the Hmx1 gene is crucial for normal external ear development and when disrupted can mimic loss-of function Hmx1 coding mutations in mice and humans. These findings provide important support for conserved developmental roles of CNEs in divergent species, and reinforce the concept that CNEs should be examined systematically in the ongoing search for genetic causes of human developmental disorders in the era of genome-scale sequencing.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
Malaysia 1 4%
United States 1 4%
Unknown 20 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 26%
Student > Bachelor 4 17%
Student > Master 2 9%
Professor 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 17%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 7 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 27 June 2019.
All research outputs
#13,704,744
of 22,739,983 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#4,818
of 13,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,428
of 305,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#52
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,739,983 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,543 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 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 50% of its contemporaries.