↓ Skip to main content

The Impact of Phosphorylation on Electron Capture Dissociation of Proteins: A Top-Down Perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
The Impact of Phosphorylation on Electron Capture Dissociation of Proteins: A Top-Down Perspective
Published in
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13361-017-1710-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bifan Chen, Xiao Guo, Trisha Tucholski, Ziqing Lin, Sean McIlwain, Ying Ge

Abstract

Electron capture dissociation (ECD) is well suited for the characterization of phosphoproteins, with which labile phosphate groups are generally preserved during the fragmentation process. However, the impact of phosphorylation on ECD fragmentation of intact proteins remains unclear. Here, we have performed a systematic investigation of the phosphorylation effect on ECD of intact proteins by comparing the ECD cleavages of mono-phosphorylated α-casein, multi-phosphorylated β-casein, and immunoaffinity-purified phosphorylated cardiac troponin I with those of their unphosphorylated counterparts, respectively. In contrast to phosphopeptides, phosphorylation has significantly reduced deleterious effects on the fragmentation of intact proteins during ECD. On a global scale, the fragmentation patterns are highly comparable between unphosphorylated and phosphorylated precursors under the same ECD conditions, despite a slight decrease in the number of fragment ions observed for the phosphorylated forms. On a local scale, single phosphorylation of intact proteins imposes minimal effects on fragmentation near the phosphorylation sites, but multiple phosphorylations in close proximity result in a significant reduction of ECD bond cleavages. Graphical Abstract ᅟ.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 29%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 18%
Researcher 2 12%
Student > Postgraduate 2 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 12%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 2 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 8 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Unknown 4 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 July 2017.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#2,946
of 3,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,862
of 326,018 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#41
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,835 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 326,018 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.