↓ Skip to main content

Inhibitory effects of monoterpenes on human TRPA1 and the structural basis of their activity

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Physiological Sciences, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#23 of 325)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
patent
4 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Inhibitory effects of monoterpenes on human TRPA1 and the structural basis of their activity
Published in
The Journal of Physiological Sciences, October 2013
DOI 10.1007/s12576-013-0289-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masayuki Takaishi, Kunitoshi Uchida, Fumitaka Fujita, Makoto Tominaga

Abstract

TRPA1, one of the transient receptor potential channels, has been reported to be involved in nociception and inflammatory pain, suggesting that this molecule could be a promising target for the development of analgesic agents. We screened several monoterpene analogs of camphor, which is known to inhibit human (h) TRPA1, to identify more effective naturally occurring TRPA1 antagonists. Borneol, 2-methylisoborneol, and fenchyl alcohol exhibited higher inhibitory effects on hTRPA1 activity than either camphor or 1,8-cineole. Our results revealed further that the S873, T874, and Y812 residues of hTRPA1 were involved in the inhibitory effects, suggesting that the hydroxyl group in the six-membered ring of the inhibitors may be interacting with these amino acids. Further research on these identified TRPA1 antagonists could lead to new pain therapeutics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 67 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Researcher 7 10%
Other 7 10%
Student > Master 7 10%
Other 15 22%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 12%
Chemistry 6 9%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 17 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 03 May 2022.
All research outputs
#3,096,018
of 24,677,985 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#23
of 325 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,781
of 216,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,677,985 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 325 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 216,993 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them