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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Robust Red FRET Sensors Using Self-Associating Fluorescent Domains
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ACS Chemical Biology, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1021/cb400427b |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laurens H. Lindenburg, Anne M. Hessels, Eduard H. T. M. Ebberink, Remco Arts, Maarten Merkx |
| Abstract |
Elucidation of subcellular signaling networks by multiparameter imaging is hindered by a lack of sensitive FRET pairs spectrally compatible with the classic CFP/YFP pair. Here, we present a generic strategy to enhance the traditionally poor sensitivity of red FRET sensors by developing self-associating variants of mOrange and mCherry that allow sensors to switch between well-defined on- and off states. Requiring just a single mutation of the mFruit domain, this new FRET pair improved the dynamic range of protease sensors up to 10-fold and was essential to generate functional red variants of CFP-YFP-based Zn(2+) sensors. The large dynamic range afforded by the new red FRET pair allowed simultaneous use of differently colored Zn(2+) FRET sensors to image Zn(2+) over a broad concentration range in the same cellular compartment. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 3% |
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 22% |
| Researcher | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 23 | 30% |
| Chemistry | 15 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 20% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 20% |
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 31 August 2013.
All research outputs
#15,278,165
of 22,719,618 outputs
Outputs from ACS Chemical Biology
#2,525
of 3,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,267
of 199,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ACS Chemical Biology
#39
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,719,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,249 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 199,368 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.