↓ Skip to main content

Increasing Prion Propensity by Hydrophobic Insertion

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2014
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Increasing Prion Propensity by Hydrophobic Insertion
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0089286
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aaron C. Gonzalez Nelson, Kacy R. Paul, Michelina Petri, Noe Flores, Ryan A. Rogge, Sean M. Cascarina, Eric D. Ross

Abstract

Prion formation involves the conversion of proteins from a soluble form into an infectious amyloid form. Most yeast prion proteins contain glutamine/asparagine-rich regions that are responsible for prion aggregation. Prion formation by these domains is driven primarily by amino acid composition, not primary sequence, yet there is a surprising disconnect between the amino acids thought to have the highest aggregation propensity and those that are actually found in yeast prion domains. Specifically, a recent mutagenic screen suggested that both aromatic and non-aromatic hydrophobic residues strongly promote prion formation. However, while aromatic residues are common in yeast prion domains, non-aromatic hydrophobic residues are strongly under-represented. Here, we directly test the effects of hydrophobic and aromatic residues on prion formation. Remarkably, we found that insertion of as few as two hydrophobic residues resulted in a multiple orders-of-magnitude increase in prion formation, and significant acceleration of in vitro amyloid formation. Thus, insertion or deletion of hydrophobic residues provides a simple tool to control the prion activity of a protein. These data, combined with bioinformatics analysis, suggest a limit on the number of strongly prion-promoting residues tolerated in glutamine/asparagine-rich domains. This limit may explain the under-representation of non-aromatic hydrophobic residues in yeast prion domains. Prion activity requires not only that a protein be able to form prion fibers, but also that these fibers be cleaved to generate new independently-segregating aggregates to offset dilution by cell division. Recent studies suggest that aromatic residues, but not non-aromatic hydrophobic residues, support the fiber cleavage step. Therefore, we propose that while both aromatic and non-aromatic hydrophobic residues promote prion formation, aromatic residues are favored in yeast prion domains because they serve a dual function, promoting both prion formation and chaperone-dependent prion propagation.

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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 42%
Researcher 10 22%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Professor 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 2 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 38%
Materials Science 2 4%
Chemistry 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 2%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 13 September 2015.
All research outputs
#2,275,189
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#29,069
of 194,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,505
of 224,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#928
of 5,782 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,149 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 224,154 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,782 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.