| Title |
Dietary requirements of “nutritionally non-essential amino acids” by animals and humans
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Amino Acids, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00726-012-1444-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Guoyao Wu, Zhenlong Wu, Zhaolai Dai, Ying Yang, Weiwei Wang, Chuang Liu, Bin Wang, Junjun Wang, Yulong Yin |
| Abstract |
Amino acids are necessary for the survival, growth, development, reproduction and health of all organisms. They were traditionally classified as nutritionally essential or non-essential for mammals, birds and fish based on nitrogen balance or growth. It was assumed that all "non-essential amino acids (NEAA)" were synthesized sufficiently in the body to meet the needs for maximal growth and health. However, there has been no compelling experimental evidence to support this assumption over the past century. NEAA (e.g., glutamine, glutamate, proline, glycine and arginine) play important roles in regulating gene expression, cell signaling, antioxidative responses, neurotransmission, and immunity. Additionally, glutamate, glutamine and aspartate are major metabolic fuels for the small intestine to maintain its digestive function and protect its mucosal integrity. Therefore, based on new research findings, NEAA should be taken into consideration in revising the classical "ideal protein" concept and formulating balanced diets to improve protein accretion, food efficiency, and health in animals and humans. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 294 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 291 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 53 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 51 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 12% |
| Researcher | 21 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 18 | 6% |
| Other | 43 | 15% |
| Unknown | 73 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 93 | 32% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 27 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 12 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 47 | 16% |
| Unknown | 92 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 June 2015.
All research outputs
#14,741,936
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from Amino Acids
#980
of 1,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,129
of 280,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Amino Acids
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,512 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 280,039 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 53% of its contemporaries.