↓ Skip to main content

Mapping the sequence mutations of the 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus neuraminidase relative to drug and antibody binding sites

Overview of attention for article published in Biology Direct, May 2009
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 (84th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
75 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Mapping the sequence mutations of the 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus neuraminidase relative to drug and antibody binding sites
Published in
Biology Direct, May 2009
DOI 10.1186/1745-6150-4-18
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastian Maurer-Stroh, Jianmin Ma, Raphael Tze Chuen Lee, Fernanda L Sirota, Frank Eisenhaber

Abstract

In this work, we study the consequences of sequence variations of the "2009 H1N1" (swine or Mexican flu) influenza A virus strain neuraminidase for drug treatment and vaccination. We find that it is phylogenetically more closely related to European H1N1 swine flu and H5N1 avian flu rather than to the H1N1 counterparts in the Americas. Homology-based 3D structure modeling reveals that the novel mutations are preferentially located at the protein surface and do not interfere with the active site. The latter is the binding cavity for 3 currently used neuraminidase inhibitors: oseltamivir (Tamiflu), zanamivir (Relenza) and peramivir; thus, the drugs should remain effective for treatment. However, the antigenic regions of the neuraminidase relevant for vaccine development, serological typing and passive antibody treatment can differ from those of previous strains and already vary among patients.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Brazil 2 2%
France 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 95 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 16%
Student > Master 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Professor 8 7%
Other 25 23%
Unknown 5 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 51 48%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 4%
Computer Science 4 4%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 8 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 07 May 2011.
All research outputs
#4,228,136
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#158
of 537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,685
of 107,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 107,128 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.