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 |
Spider-Venom Peptides: Structure, Pharmacology, and Potential for Control of Insect Pests
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annual Review of Entomology, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153650 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Glenn F. King, Margaret C. Hardy |
| Abstract |
Spider venoms are an incredibly rich source of disulfide-rich insecticidal peptides that have been tuned over millions of years to target a wide range of receptors and ion channels in the insect nervous system. These peptides can act individually, or as part of larger toxin cabals, to rapidly immobilize envenomated prey owing to their debilitating effects on nervous system function. Most of these peptides contain a unique arrangement of disulfide bonds that provides them with extreme resistance to proteases. As a result, these peptides are highly stable in the insect gut and hemolymph and many of them are orally active. Thus, spider-venom peptides can be used as stand-alone bioinsecticides, or transgenes encoding these peptides can be used to engineer insect-resistant crops or enhanced entomopathogens. We critically review the potential of spider-venom peptides to control insect pests and highlight their advantages and disadvantages compared with conventional chemical insecticides. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 29% |
| Australia | 2 | 29% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 355 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 349 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 65 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 54 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 50 | 14% |
| Researcher | 46 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 4% |
| Other | 47 | 13% |
| Unknown | 80 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 123 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 67 | 19% |
| Chemistry | 19 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 10 | 3% |
| Other | 31 | 9% |
| Unknown | 95 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 118. 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 02 April 2024.
All research outputs
#361,227
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from Annual Review of Entomology
#20
of 1,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,807
of 195,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annual Review of Entomology
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 195,492 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.