↓ Skip to main content

The Role of DNA Restriction-Modification Systems in the Biology of Bacillus anthracis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 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
The Role of DNA Restriction-Modification Systems in the Biology of Bacillus anthracis
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.00011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ramakrishnan Sitaraman

Abstract

Restriction-modification (R-M) systems are widespread among prokaryotes and, depending on their type, may be viewed as selfish genetic elements that persist as toxin-antitoxin modules, or as cellular defense systems against phage infection that confer a selective advantage to the host bacterium. Studies in the last decade have made it amply clear that these two options do not exhaust the list of possible biological roles for R-M systems. Their presence in a cell may also have a bearing on other processes such as horizontal gene transfer and gene regulation. From genome sequencing and experimental data, we know that Bacillus anthracis encodes at least three methylation-dependent (typeIV) restriction endonucleases (RE), and an orphan DNA methyltransferase. In this article, we first present an outline of our current knowledge of R-M systems in B. anthracis. Based on available DNA sequence data, and on our current understanding of the functions of similar genes in other systems, we conclude with hypotheses on the possible roles of the three REs and the orphan DNA methyltransferase.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Unknown 95 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 20%
Student > Bachelor 16 17%
Student > Master 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 33 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 25%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 34 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 30 November 2020.
All research outputs
#6,760,998
of 24,093,053 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#6,683
of 27,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,693
of 403,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#141
of 482 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,093,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 27,122 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 403,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 482 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 69% of its contemporaries.