↓ Skip to main content

Yersinia pestis: Retrospective and Perspective

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 6: Genome and Evolution of Yersinia pestis.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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.
Chapter title
Genome and Evolution of Yersinia pestis.
Chapter number 6
Book title
Yersinia pestis: Retrospective and Perspective
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-94-024-0890-4_6
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-9-40-240888-1, 978-9-40-240890-4
Authors

Yujun Cui, Yajun Song, Cui, Yujun, Song, Yajun

Editors

Ruifu Yang, Andrey Anisimov

Abstract

This chapter summarizes researches on genome and evolution features of Yersinia pestis, the young pathogen that evolved from Y. pseudotuberculosis at least 5000 years ago. Y. pestis is a highly clonal bacterial species with closed pan-genome. Comparative genomic analysis revealed that genome of Y. pestis experienced highly frequent rearrangement and genome decay events during the evolution. The genealogy of Y. pestis includes five major branches, and four of them seemed raised from a "big bang" node that is associated with the Black Death. Although whole genome-wide variation of Y. pestis reflected a neutral evolutionary process, the branch length in the genealogical tree revealed over dispersion, which was supposedly caused by varied historical molecular clock that is associated with demographical effect by alternate cycles of enzootic disease and epizootic disease in sylvatic plague foci. In recent years, palaeomicrobiology researches on victims of the Black Death, and Justinian's plague verified that two historical pandemics were indeed caused by Y. pestis, but the etiological lineages might be extinct today.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 5%
Unknown 19 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 25%
Researcher 5 25%
Student > Master 3 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 4 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 35%
Environmental Science 2 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 4 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 15 June 2020.
All research outputs
#17,932,284
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#2,781
of 5,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,816
of 405,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#234
of 445 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,312 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 405,639 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 445 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.