↓ Skip to main content

Origin and evolution of spliceosomal introns

Overview of attention for article published in Biology Direct, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#41 of 574)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
9 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
167 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
379 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Origin and evolution of spliceosomal introns
Published in
Biology Direct, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1745-6150-7-11
Pubmed ID
Authors

Igor B Rogozin, Liran Carmel, Miklos Csuros, Eugene V Koonin

Abstract

Evolution of exon-intron structure of eukaryotic genes has been a matter of long-standing, intensive debate. The introns-early concept, later rebranded 'introns first' held that protein-coding genes were interrupted by numerous introns even at the earliest stages of life's evolution and that introns played a major role in the origin of proteins by facilitating recombination of sequences coding for small protein/peptide modules. The introns-late concept held that introns emerged only in eukaryotes and new introns have been accumulating continuously throughout eukaryotic evolution. Analysis of orthologous genes from completely sequenced eukaryotic genomes revealed numerous shared intron positions in orthologous genes from animals and plants and even between animals, plants and protists, suggesting that many ancestral introns have persisted since the last eukaryotic common ancestor (LECA). Reconstructions of intron gain and loss using the growing collection of genomes of diverse eukaryotes and increasingly advanced probabilistic models convincingly show that the LECA and the ancestors of each eukaryotic supergroup had intron-rich genes, with intron densities comparable to those in the most intron-rich modern genomes such as those of vertebrates. The subsequent evolution in most lineages of eukaryotes involved primarily loss of introns, with only a few episodes of substantial intron gain that might have accompanied major evolutionary innovations such as the origin of metazoa. The original invasion of self-splicing Group II introns, presumably originating from the mitochondrial endosymbiont, into the genome of the emerging eukaryote might have been a key factor of eukaryogenesis that in particular triggered the origin of endomembranes and the nucleus. Conversely, splicing errors gave rise to alternative splicing, a major contribution to the biological complexity of multicellular eukaryotes. There is no indication that any prokaryote has ever possessed a spliceosome or introns in protein-coding genes, other than relatively rare mobile self-splicing introns. Thus, the introns-first scenario is not supported by any evidence but exon-intron structure of protein-coding genes appears to have evolved concomitantly with the eukaryotic cell, and introns were a major factor of evolution throughout the history of eukaryotes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 379 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 9 2%
Germany 5 1%
Spain 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Other 13 3%
Unknown 336 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 104 27%
Researcher 93 25%
Student > Bachelor 53 14%
Student > Master 40 11%
Professor 14 4%
Other 48 13%
Unknown 27 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 208 55%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 97 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 2%
Computer Science 6 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 1%
Other 22 6%
Unknown 35 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 23 February 2019.
All research outputs
#775,815
of 14,375,216 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#41
of 574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,521
of 92,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,375,216 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 574 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 92,747 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.