↓ Skip to main content

Recognition of microbial glycans by soluble human lectins

Overview of attention for article published in Current Opinion in Structural Biology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 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.
Title
Recognition of microbial glycans by soluble human lectins
Published in
Current Opinion in Structural Biology, May 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.sbi.2017.04.002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Darryl A Wesener, Amanda Dugan, Laura L Kiessling

Abstract

Human innate immune lectins that recognize microbial glycans can conduct microbial surveillance and thereby help prevent infection. Structural analysis of soluble lectins has provided invaluable insight into how these proteins recognize their cognate carbohydrate ligands and how this recognition gives rise to biological function. In this opinion, we cover the structural features of lectins that allow them to mediate microbial recognition, highlighting examples from the collectin, Reg protein, galectin, pentraxin, ficolin and intelectin families. These analyses reveal how some lectins (e.g., human intelectin-1) can recognize glycan epitopes that are remarkably diverse, yet still differentiate between mammalian and microbial glycans. We additionally discuss strategies to identify lectins that recognize microbial glycans and highlight tools that facilitate these discovery efforts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 119 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 29%
Student > Master 13 11%
Researcher 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 23 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 30 25%
Chemistry 27 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 30 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 30 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,486,489
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Current Opinion in Structural Biology
#138
of 2,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,943
of 324,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Opinion in Structural Biology
#3
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,067 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. 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 324,919 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.