↓ Skip to main content

Computational Prediction of Effector Proteins in Fungi: Opportunities and Challenges

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
271 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
Computational Prediction of Effector Proteins in Fungi: Opportunities and Challenges
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2016.00126
Pubmed ID
Authors

Humira Sonah, Rupesh K. Deshmukh, Richard R. Bélanger

Abstract

Effector proteins are mostly secretory proteins that stimulate plant infection by manipulating the host response. Identifying fungal effector proteins and understanding their function is of great importance in efforts to curb losses to plant diseases. Recent advances in high-throughput sequencing technologies have facilitated the availability of several fungal genomes and 1000s of transcriptomes. As a result, the growing amount of genomic information has provided great opportunities to identify putative effector proteins in different fungal species. There is little consensus over the annotation and functionality of effector proteins, and mostly small secretory proteins are considered as effector proteins, a concept that tends to overestimate the number of proteins involved in a plant-pathogen interaction. With the characterization of Avr genes, criteria for computational prediction of effector proteins are becoming more efficient. There are 100s of tools available for the identification of conserved motifs, signature sequences and structural features in the proteins. Many pipelines and online servers, which combine several tools, are made available to perform genome-wide identification of effector proteins. In this review, available tools and pipelines, their strength and limitations for effective identification of fungal effector proteins are discussed. We also present an exhaustive list of classically secreted proteins along with their key conserved motifs found in 12 common plant pathogens (11 fungi and one oomycete) through an analytical pipeline.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 271 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 266 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 62 23%
Researcher 40 15%
Student > Bachelor 38 14%
Student > Master 30 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 7%
Other 30 11%
Unknown 51 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 141 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 52 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 2%
Computer Science 4 1%
Engineering 4 1%
Other 11 4%
Unknown 54 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 10 July 2017.
All research outputs
#4,052,539
of 22,846,662 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#2,100
of 20,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,026
of 400,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#45
of 486 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,846,662 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,177 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 400,467 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 486 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.