↓ Skip to main content

Eukaryotic Membranes and Cytoskeleton

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 3: Origin of eukaryotic endomembranes: a critical evaluation of different model scenarios.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Origin of eukaryotic endomembranes: a critical evaluation of different model scenarios.
Chapter number 3
Book title
Eukaryotic Membranes and Cytoskeleton
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-74021-8_3
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-0-387-74020-1, 978-0-387-74021-8
Authors

Gáspár Jékely, Jékely, Gáspár

Abstract

All cells can be assigned to one of two categories based on the complexity of cellular organization, eukaryotes and prokaryotes. Eukaryotes possess, among other distinguishing features, an intracellular dynamic membrane system through which there is a constant flow of membranes scaffolded by an internal cytoskeleton. Prokaryotes, however, can have internal membranes, entirely lack a system that resembles eukaryotic endomembranes in terms of dynamics, complexity and the multitude of functions. How and why did the complex endomembrane system of eukaryotes arise? Here I give a critical overview of the different cell biological model scenarios that have been proposed to explain endomembrane origins. I argue that the widely held symbiotic models for the origin of the nuclear envelope and other endomembranes are cell biologically and evolutionarily highly implausible. Recent findings about the origin of nuclear pore complexes also severely challenge such models. I also criticize a scenario of de novo vesicle formation at the origin of the endomembrane system. I contrast these scenarios to traditional and revised autogenous models according to which eukaryotic endomembranes evolved by the inward budding of a prokaryotic cell's plasma membrane. I argue that such models can best satisfy the major constraints of membrane topology, membrane heredity and straightforwardly account for selection pressures while being consistent with genomic findings.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
India 1 2%
Czechia 1 2%
Unknown 40 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Professor 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 December 2015.
All research outputs
#7,454,427
of 22,789,566 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#1,227
of 4,940 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,986
of 321,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#28
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,789,566 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,940 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 321,223 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 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 66% of its contemporaries.