↓ Skip to main content

Cis-encoded non-coding antisense RNAs in streptococci and other low GC Gram (+) bacterial pathogens

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Cis-encoded non-coding antisense RNAs in streptococci and other low GC Gram (+) bacterial pathogens
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2015.00110
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kyu Hong Cho, Jeong-Ho Kim

Abstract

Due to recent advances of bioinformatics and high throughput sequencing technology, discovery of regulatory non-coding RNAs in bacteria has been increased to a great extent. Based on this bandwagon, many studies searching for trans-acting small non-coding RNAs in streptococci have been performed intensively, especially in the important human pathogen, group A and B streptococci. However, studies for cis-encoded non-coding antisense RNAs in streptococci have been scarce. A recent study shows antisense RNAs are involved in virulence gene regulation in group B streptococcus, S. agalactiae. This suggests antisense RNAs could have important roles in the pathogenesis of streptococcal pathogens. In this review, we describe recent discoveries of chromosomal cis-encoded antisense RNAs in streptococcal pathogens and other low GC Gram (+) bacteria to provide a guide for future studies.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 31%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Professor 3 9%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 29%
Unspecified 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 20%
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 26 March 2015.
All research outputs
#18,403,994
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#7,032
of 11,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,700
of 263,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#127
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,761 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 263,459 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.