↓ Skip to main content

Cell division in Corynebacterineae

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

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
Cell division in Corynebacterineae
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, April 2014
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00132
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catriona Donovan, Marc Bramkamp

Abstract

Bacterial cells must coordinate a number of events during the cell cycle. Spatio-temporal regulation of bacterial cytokinesis is indispensable for the production of viable, genetically identical offspring. In many rod-shaped bacteria, precise midcell assembly of the division machinery relies on inhibitory systems such as Min and Noc. In rod-shaped Actinobacteria, for example Corynebacterium glutamicum and Mycobacterium tuberculosis, the divisome assembles in the proximity of the midcell region, however more spatial flexibility is observed compared to Escherichia coli and Bacillus subtilis. Actinobacteria represent a group of bacteria that spatially regulate cytokinesis in the absence of recognizable Min and Noc homologs. The key cell division steps in E. coli and B. subtilis have been subject to intensive study and are well-understood. In comparison, only a minimal set of positive and negative regulators of cytokinesis are known in Actinobacteria. Nonetheless, the timing of cytokinesis and the placement of the division septum is coordinated with growth as well as initiation of chromosome replication and segregation. We summarize here the current knowledge on cytokinesis and division site selection in the Actinobacteria suborder Corynebacterineae.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 %
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 116 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 24%
Researcher 23 19%
Student > Master 18 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 3%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 25 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 48 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 26 22%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 8%
Engineering 2 2%
Chemistry 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 28 23%
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 23 September 2015.
All research outputs
#17,719,424
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#17,015
of 24,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,812
of 228,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#99
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,620 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 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 228,161 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.